One of the artists posted an illustration he did for one of the core books where orcs aren't savages any more but are a friendly, happy family group (smiling kids with mom and dad).
The 6e adventurer party cancelled the Dark Lord, as the dungeon wasn't combat wheelchair accessible. (My wife has to use a wheelchair, and I know how even tiny obstructions can mess things up.)
When the 3rd (or 3.5??) ed supplement that had rules for dragon riders came out, I had a cool idea to make a Grey Elf who rode a Silver Dragon. I was also trying to make him a Paladin with certain combat feats to fit my concept. I wasn't even trying to minmax it too much, I just had a concept I was going for. After spending hours I had worked out all the prerequisite feats, feats I wanted, stat increases etc for each level. Then I realized I had forgotten one key feat that was required by a certain level. I just crumpled up the sheet of paper and literally never played that edition again.
'Mr Welch' created a video of what he considered the 'perfect' D&D game system drawing only from the various versions of D&D (Basic to 5e). th-cam.com/video/qK0CrzAagME/w-d-xo.html Also, check out his 'things Mr Welch can no longer do in an rpg' because he's the poster boy of being The Loon when playing RPGs. He also did a YT version of it (3 hours). That list is over 2,600+ behaviors long... '152. When the guy is at -9 HP is not the best time for my cleric to convert him.'
Very appropiate name for an OSR in Polish history, considering the novel "Baptism Of Fire" written by Andrzej Sapkowski, the Polish author of "The Witcher".
Yes, it's funny because I named it after the Baptism of Poland, which is what the setting of the game is about. I never read any of the Witcher novels (nor played the game, and I only watched a couple of episodes of the show) and so I had no idea until well after the project that there was a Witcher novel of that same name.
Spell bloat is very obnoxious. Although my guess is its something like 5 variations of each spell unique to each subclass. Wizard fireball, paladin fireball, druid fireball, etc.
What do you mean? Flipping through? No one's going to be flipping through this. Let's be honest it's probably designed for digital. Let's be honest, that's where they want most people to buy it.
I'm sure people will point out that there are still good and bad options, and there is still plenty of optimization in 5e. But it was a much simpler game, and before the Tasha's book, it was much more balanced than 3rd edition and more approachable than 4th edition. All the people I see trying to fix 5e with house rules or new games miss the point of the simplicity because they've played it so much that they effectively have achieved a kind of system mastery. They start adding systems and subsystems and three different kinds of points to keep track of and a dozen "wouldn't it be great if" options and it just becomes a mess. Instead of going for more elegance, they go for more cruft.
BOF is the rpg right now for me. Once I’ll get my new player to the hobby and they understand the basics of the mechanics, they will go into the 11th century 🇵🇱 and we will be in gaming paradise. Thanks you for the high quality content and games!
Gotta be honest, I mostly just play what looks cool/suits the character I'm playing. I've taken piles of stuff purely for what some people call "fluff" and I apologize for nothing.
The thing that really sucked about 3.5 was that not only could you charop, but to some extent you HAD to charop. Not just to have a strong enough character, but if you wanted any particular feat or prestige class, you often had to plan for it 5+ levels in advance. This totally contradicts the spirit of RPGs in that you will very rarely roleplay your way into a prestige class as intended. E.g. "you fought along side the dragon slayers so you could join their prestige class. Oh wait you didn't take 10 ranks of Lore (Dragon), nevermind." I always liked the idea of prestige classes, but I'm not sure if anyone has come up with a good way to do them.
I remember how excited I was when 3E came out. I loved the idea of more customization for characters. It seemed, though, that building a character became more prominent than playing a character. All of my personal design now is an attempt to balance customization with a streamlined system that minimizes bloat.
4th edition of D&D was the only system that handled prestige classes well. 4e calls them "paragon" paths that you choose once you hit lvl 11, and play until lvl 20. D&D was never really meant to go past lvl 14 and D20 systems proved just how unbalanced it could be if left unchecked. BECMI had rules for 15-36, but those were called "immortal" levels for a reason. I always found 4e's solution to be the most elegant one for fun without breaking balance. Treating them like multiclasses with requirements always felt like the players were being punished for roleplaying.
From what they showed, the new art is not to my taste. If the art is not AI produced at least in part, it is clearly designed to look compatible with AI art. That way going forward when they start using AI art it will look the same. The other changes are just shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic. It's not going to win over new people who are already in the hobby but it's going to make their fan base happy. Seems unlikely to be the final edition of D&D.
I don't know how many it would make happy, unless by "fan base" you just mean the most radical leftists who don't care very much about playing the game.
@@RPGPundit didn't even their worst selling supplements sell to like 15 or 25,000 people? A lot of people playing love this game and I think that many of them will buy this., if only from FOMO.
More "options" actually mean less options for creativity. As you allude to, when you start specifying all these specific maneuvers, it implies that you cannot do anything without "permission" from the game.
I am continuously shocked by people still having hopes for this mess of a game. Great video! Unrelated, but I had a Star Adventurer question (I happen to be running it as I'm typing, haha). Do characters roll on the benefit table at first level?
@@RPGPundit Thank you! That's what I thought seeing as one does so in L&D, but I just wanted to make sure. Can confirm that session 1 was a great success! Players were ecstatic.
Will you do a Song Dynasty setting or rulebook? I would love to buy it. Also i bought recently cult of chaos and i love it. My favourite part was entry about elves how were at height of their civilization: once an honest demon worshiper who sacrificed humans for their dark religion and then grew decadent starting mating with humans and starting death cult. Thats was gold gonzo. Even demonic cultist can grow decadent. Hope you have a nice day! Edit: I just saw video about new paladin. Holy shit this art is terrible.
Also, Legends of the Wulin (but the book is a bit disorganized) Feng Shui (with some modification) And if you want something insanely over the top - Exalted
I wonder if "Weapon Mastery" is going to be the similarly named system ported over from BECMI? I mean I doubt it, but wouldn't it be interesting if there was something else brought over (like the Tortles) from that forgotten setting.
@15:30 Definitely true that weapon mastery (and spell lists, and feats, etc) generally have a few dominant choices due to poor design. But it should be easy to balance them if the designer takes the time to play-test properly. Suppose you have 20 feats. With as many min-max players as possible who know the system, have them bid on each feat. If Feat A has significantly more votes than average, weaken it. If Feat B has fewer, strengthen it. If it can't be changed without essentially destroying it, it probably doesn't belong in the list. It's the same concept as splitting a cake for 2 fat kids. To avoid arguments, assign one butterball to cut the cake while the other activist is then allowed to choose which piece she wants. @18:30 You can argue the details, but my all-time favorite conceptual way of handling fighters is LoTFP. Fighters are the only class to improve to-hit as they level. "But that's too extreme!!" the tiefling furry rogue-druid-bard-mincing prancer will shriek. Yeah, that's the whole point. It's also "extreme" that wizards have spells while fighters do not.
LotFP does a good job of securing fighter niche protection. I didn't go quite that far in my games, but fighters still have vastly more bonuses in combat and damage than any other class.
The self-aware woke posturing of OneD&D is eye-rolling, but the rules bloat is a real problem. Take the 12 basic classes and make them effectively 48? Boy, that's a lot of pages, especially if each subclass has its own feats, abilities, spells, and limitations. (Do we still have race & class limitations? Haven't heard much about them recently.) 5E's strength is supposed to be its simple, easy to learn, easy to develop characters and system play. Even 2E had the wisdom to keep all the specialized builds in their own series of supplements, for players who were comfortable with playing the basics and were ready for specialization and long-term development planning. And a longer, thicker rulebook is more expensive, which is a real issue these days. A $49.95 core book is already an issue for many players. A $69.95 rulebook ($49.95 PDF) isn't going to lead to increased sales.
An edition nobody (that matters) asked for or wanted. I think the goal here was to include anything and everything not excluded from the irrevocable OGL. The intent to claim ownership of compatible creator content hasn’t changed.
3rd edition kind of sucked. I remember wanting to like it, trying to play it, and eventually giving up and getting into making my own systems, which also honestly kind of sucked but I was real young. LOL
Respectfully disagree on your fighter comment. Fighters are great early on. But they do need something for later level play as they are often left behind by the other classes. So they do need something beyond just being a fighter in and of itself as I've seen it happen time and again with higher level fighters as they became redundent (especially after 10th level.) But you are right about bloat so its a balancing act to keep fighters effective without overdoing it.
Fighters in DCC and fighters in Lion & Dragon/Baptism of Fire do not get left behind, and both sets of games figure out how to do that in two totally different ways, and in both cases far better than "weapon mastery"
@@RPGPundit Your take on fighters in Baptism is interesting. Maybe its just the fact I have seen more then a few high level fighters falter (often only remaining useful because of gear) that makes me a little jaded on the fighter class. I'll consider what you said in this then.
The thing I don't agree on is the negative view of fighters with special combat moves. If you are not trained for combat, you are likely not going to do something complex under the pressure of a fight with any relevant chance of success. I think that things like throwing sand in your enemy's eyes or weighting their strength before striking are reasonable for everyone, but it's reasonable to assume you won't use any technique in fencing handbooks. It would be better if they had a small number of actually unique and useful spells and have these kinds of manoeuvres to fighters: no rule bloat and no need for endless magical fighter subclasses to give fighters some mechanical abilities
The thing is, if you watched the video you realize I'm not saying that fighters shouldn't get to do special things. I'm saying that the way to do it with a list of special moves is the wrong way. I used DCC as an example of the RIGHT way to do this.
@@RPGPundit don't you think that fighters with different training should know different tricks? I mean, when I wrote my game (not released, I use it at my table) it seemed reasonable to me that a centurion could do stuff to bring allies into formation, while the brute can do things like pushing and breaking stuff. That's why that idea of fighters having a list of manoeuvres doesn't seem that bad to me
They're not lying when they say this is just a tweaking of 5e. They have no one capable of doing anything new, much less better than 5e. So this isn't a "new edition', this is the end-stage version of 5e. I'm sure the core books will provide a boost in sales, but then in a relatively short while sales will drop again and continue to worsen.
@@RPGPundit I moved over to C&C many years ago. It's a pity that the grandaddy RPG has come to this, but Free-Will's a bitch and they made their choices.
Sorry, but I like the new rules, I also like Aasimar and Goliaths being added to the PHB (although I'd add the Genasi and Gobliniods as well). A lot of the stuff is practical like eminations as a new name for a kind of area of effect that well eminates from a particular point. I like Weapon Mastery. I will say the race swapped the Greyhawk Elf Queen Yan to black which is embarrassing, but at least the black wizard chick is super hot (she appears in a couple of pieces of art, she might be an Aasimar and she looks like she's from the Strixhaven school Silverquill). This is not a deal breaker for me. Oh and its not just fighters who get Weapon Mastery.
I seen those DnD pics of mexican orcs ..diverse elves and gay dwarves and wow. When you look at the art in the BECMI DnD you are inspired to game with this im inspired to throw up
Can’t you ever say anything nice. You praise all our work and criticize anyone else. How about doing something positive about products other than yours 😢
@@RPGPundit thank you for your feedback. I’ll just stop watching and buying your products. And yes, I have purchased a number of your products. You’ve got great talent. Thank you again for your response.
I never understand the problem people have with black women in fantasy books? First you say, it’s “woke” to have a black women because they are doing it for some sinister or other reason, they should have white dudes because that’s the demographic which plays the game. Then you lament that they are making the game more tactical so the demographic which does not play the game is being pushed out. So, what you are saying is that they cannot show images and advertise to casuals, ie, people who don’t play the game now, and in the same breath say they are not doing enough to bring in the casuals. Thats some very interesting doublespeak there.
There's no problem with black characters. The problem is when rampant efforts at propagandistic representation take place in general. It's political, and pandering.... but not to black women (who are the tiniest of tiny fractions of D&D players) but to white left wokists, and to intentionally infuriate traditional gamers.
@@RPGPundit BS. Why would it matter that there are black characters even if they are a tiny percentage of the player base? Should all the art just depict the current player base? What nonsense. You have decided to be a culture warrior and you are titling at “woke windmills” whenever you dislike something.
@@neurolancer81It matters because it is just clumsy virtue signalling by smug pseudo-liberal white people who do not actually care/know the black people they purport to (condescendingly) represent. If Wizards brought out a campaign setting based on the 'Black Leopard, Red Wolf' & 'Moon Witch, Spider King' fantasy novels by Marlon James, THAT would be actually inclusive. But then none of the Wizards top people have even heard of those novels. None of the 19 member 'executive team' at Wizards are black. Only one is Asian. Three are women, one of whom is the Asian. So diversity is honoured in the product art, but not where it actually matters.
Nobody would have any issues with african characters if pronoun people crafted authentic african settings for them and gave them a personality however it's just not what pronoun people do they shouldn't be allowed to create an avatar of marxsism serial number #6934 dress it up as medieval European knight make it a female negroid and act outraged when people start asking questions
@@neurolancer81are you familiar with the concept of authenticity? Immersion?How about historical accuracy? All of those infinitely more important than inescapable evil of the "current year "
I'm glad Mystara is safe, but it may just be the following target.
With the amount of material Mr. Welch has done I doubt it'll matter if they go after Mystara.
They are already making plans to ruin it. There's a rumour of a book that will bring all the other settings to 5.5. Except Dark Sun, of course.
@@henriquecamboim They can only ruin what you let them ruin. I wish I could get into Mystara but eh.
There is a proper 5E Mystara book already, and I have the PDF. WOTC can do as they wish, I don't have to buy the brand, anymore.
@@observationsfromthebunker9639 Hail! That's from Mr Welch?
One of the artists posted an illustration he did for one of the core books where orcs aren't savages any more but are a friendly, happy family group (smiling kids with mom and dad).
Yuck. This isn't a "power of friendship" cartoon.
Yeah, I saw that... made me want to puke.
They don’t get angry until straight, white, Christian come to colonize their ancestral lands.
Was it the image where they looked like Rancheros crossing the [desert] 😉?
They’re happy until the straight, white, Christian men show up.
The 6e adventurer party cancelled the Dark Lord, as the dungeon wasn't combat wheelchair accessible.
(My wife has to use a wheelchair, and I know how even tiny obstructions can mess things up.)
Spread the word, share the video!
Damn man... I'd be putting stairs everywhere!
When the 3rd (or 3.5??) ed supplement that had rules for dragon riders came out, I had a cool idea to make a Grey Elf who rode a Silver Dragon. I was also trying to make him a Paladin with certain combat feats to fit my concept. I wasn't even trying to minmax it too much, I just had a concept I was going for. After spending hours I had worked out all the prerequisite feats, feats I wanted, stat increases etc for each level. Then I realized I had forgotten one key feat that was required by a certain level. I just crumpled up the sheet of paper and literally never played that edition again.
Quitter.
Bigger Bloated Game! Bureaucracies love the Bloat!
Spread the word, share the video!
I really dislike the art they’ve been showing from the new D&D edition (that isn’t a new edition).
Spread the word, share the video!
Professor DM at Dungeon Craft is on the money with this: crunchier player options equal more dollars thrown at WotC's digital tools.
Yes, that's potentially quite likely.
'Mr Welch' created a video of what he considered the 'perfect' D&D game system drawing only from the various versions of D&D (Basic to 5e). th-cam.com/video/qK0CrzAagME/w-d-xo.html
Also, check out his 'things Mr Welch can no longer do in an rpg' because he's the poster boy of being The Loon when playing RPGs. He also did a YT version of it (3 hours). That list is over 2,600+ behaviors long...
'152. When the guy is at -9 HP is not the best time for my cleric to convert him.'
Very appropiate name for an OSR in Polish history, considering the novel "Baptism Of Fire" written by Andrzej Sapkowski, the Polish author of "The Witcher".
Yes, it's funny because I named it after the Baptism of Poland, which is what the setting of the game is about. I never read any of the Witcher novels (nor played the game, and I only watched a couple of episodes of the show) and so I had no idea until well after the project that there was a Witcher novel of that same name.
Spell bloat is very obnoxious. Although my guess is its something like 5 variations of each spell unique to each subclass. Wizard fireball, paladin fireball, druid fireball, etc.
Bigger than PF1e core rulebook ? Oh boy, have fun flipping through that to search the specific rule you're looking for.
What do you mean?
Flipping through?
No one's going to be flipping through this.
Let's be honest it's probably designed for digital.
Let's be honest, that's where they want most people to buy it.
I'm sure people will point out that there are still good and bad options, and there is still plenty of optimization in 5e. But it was a much simpler game, and before the Tasha's book, it was much more balanced than 3rd edition and more approachable than 4th edition. All the people I see trying to fix 5e with house rules or new games miss the point of the simplicity because they've played it so much that they effectively have achieved a kind of system mastery. They start adding systems and subsystems and three different kinds of points to keep track of and a dozen "wouldn't it be great if" options and it just becomes a mess. Instead of going for more elegance, they go for more cruft.
Correct! Spread the word, share the video.
BOF is the rpg right now for me. Once I’ll get my new player to the hobby and they understand the basics of the mechanics, they will go into the 11th century 🇵🇱 and we will be in gaming paradise. Thanks you for the high quality content and games!
Thank you!
Gotta be honest, I mostly just play what looks cool/suits the character I'm playing. I've taken piles of stuff purely for what some people call "fluff" and I apologize for nothing.
And that's great, but in some editions that will mean your character will be vastly sub-optimal compared to the ones in the party who CharOp
@@RPGPundit As long as I'm having fun, I try not to worry too much about it.
The thing that really sucked about 3.5 was that not only could you charop, but to some extent you HAD to charop. Not just to have a strong enough character, but if you wanted any particular feat or prestige class, you often had to plan for it 5+ levels in advance. This totally contradicts the spirit of RPGs in that you will very rarely roleplay your way into a prestige class as intended. E.g. "you fought along side the dragon slayers so you could join their prestige class. Oh wait you didn't take 10 ranks of Lore (Dragon), nevermind."
I always liked the idea of prestige classes, but I'm not sure if anyone has come up with a good way to do them.
I remember how excited I was when 3E came out. I loved the idea of more customization for characters. It seemed, though, that building a character became more prominent than playing a character.
All of my personal design now is an attempt to balance customization with a streamlined system that minimizes bloat.
Very good point.
4th edition of D&D was the only system that handled prestige classes well. 4e calls them "paragon" paths that you choose once you hit lvl 11, and play until lvl 20.
D&D was never really meant to go past lvl 14 and D20 systems proved just how unbalanced it could be if left unchecked.
BECMI had rules for 15-36, but those were called "immortal" levels for a reason.
I always found 4e's solution to be the most elegant one for fun without breaking balance. Treating them like multiclasses with requirements always felt like the players were being punished for roleplaying.
19:36 The Deed Dice. Such an elegant solution to the fighting man vs magic man issue.
Indeed.
The question I would ask is how well do the bloated rules map to their VTT. Since that is their goal, right?
I'm not even sure if they know.
From what they showed, the new art is not to my taste. If the art is not AI produced at least in part, it is clearly designed to look compatible with AI art. That way going forward when they start using AI art it will look the same. The other changes are just shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic. It's not going to win over new people who are already in the hobby but it's going to make their fan base happy. Seems unlikely to be the final edition of D&D.
I don't know how many it would make happy, unless by "fan base" you just mean the most radical leftists who don't care very much about playing the game.
@@RPGPundit didn't even their worst selling supplements sell to like 15 or 25,000 people? A lot of people playing love this game and I think that many of them will buy this., if only from FOMO.
My power animal is a combat wheelchair.
Spread the word, share the video!
At least the Rules Cyclopedia was a one-stop-shop for everything needed.
It was a lot more than just that!
More "options" actually mean less options for creativity. As you allude to, when you start specifying all these specific maneuvers, it implies that you cannot do anything without "permission" from the game.
Spread the word, share the video!
I am continuously shocked by people still having hopes for this mess of a game. Great video! Unrelated, but I had a Star Adventurer question (I happen to be running it as I'm typing, haha). Do characters roll on the benefit table at first level?
Yes. Starting at level 1.
@@RPGPundit Thank you! That's what I thought seeing as one does so in L&D, but I just wanted to make sure.
Can confirm that session 1 was a great success! Players were ecstatic.
Will you do a Song Dynasty setting or rulebook? I would love to buy it. Also i bought recently cult of chaos and i love it. My favourite part was entry about elves how were at height of their civilization: once an honest demon worshiper who sacrificed humans for their dark religion and then grew decadent starting mating with humans and starting death cult. Thats was gold gonzo. Even demonic cultist can grow decadent. Hope you have a nice day!
Edit: I just saw video about new paladin. Holy shit this art is terrible.
Thank you. I'm sure I'll do some kind of Song supplement eventually. Spread the word, share the video!
In the meantime, there is a game called "Qin the Warring States" that may scratch your itch
Also,
Legends of the Wulin (but the book is a bit disorganized)
Feng Shui (with some modification)
And if you want something insanely over the top
- Exalted
@@cmleibenguth Thanks i will look at them. Have nice day.
This is the best thing I ever saw.
Thank you! Spread the word, share the video.
Tome of Battle: Book of Nine Swords fixed martial characters in my opinion. But I'm one of those weirdos that prefer the options of 3.5.
3.5e was a fun system for me and my group too.
So the fat ball belly dragon was a reference to the game itself it seems.
Apparently so! Spread the word, share the video!
The people behind the movie were trying to warn us…
What are Meatball's feats?
Well, she used to be able to jump amazing lengths. But now she's an old lady...
I wonder if "Weapon Mastery" is going to be the similarly named system ported over from BECMI? I mean I doubt it, but wouldn't it be interesting if there was something else brought over (like the Tortles) from that forgotten setting.
I don't think so.
Weapon mastery means jackshit in a system where combat is frowned upon or actively punished.
true! good point.
@15:30 Definitely true that weapon mastery (and spell lists, and feats, etc) generally have a few dominant choices due to poor design. But it should be easy to balance them if the designer takes the time to play-test properly. Suppose you have 20 feats. With as many min-max players as possible who know the system, have them bid on each feat. If Feat A has significantly more votes than average, weaken it. If Feat B has fewer, strengthen it. If it can't be changed without essentially destroying it, it probably doesn't belong in the list. It's the same concept as splitting a cake for 2 fat kids. To avoid arguments, assign one butterball to cut the cake while the other activist is then allowed to choose which piece she wants.
@18:30 You can argue the details, but my all-time favorite conceptual way of handling fighters is LoTFP. Fighters are the only class to improve to-hit as they level. "But that's too extreme!!" the tiefling furry rogue-druid-bard-mincing prancer will shriek. Yeah, that's the whole point. It's also "extreme" that wizards have spells while fighters do not.
LotFP does a good job of securing fighter niche protection. I didn't go quite that far in my games, but fighters still have vastly more bonuses in combat and damage than any other class.
The self-aware woke posturing of OneD&D is eye-rolling, but the rules bloat is a real problem. Take the 12 basic classes and make them effectively 48? Boy, that's a lot of pages, especially if each subclass has its own feats, abilities, spells, and limitations. (Do we still have race & class limitations? Haven't heard much about them recently.) 5E's strength is supposed to be its simple, easy to learn, easy to develop characters and system play. Even 2E had the wisdom to keep all the specialized builds in their own series of supplements, for players who were comfortable with playing the basics and were ready for specialization and long-term development planning. And a longer, thicker rulebook is more expensive, which is a real issue these days. A $49.95 core book is already an issue for many players. A $69.95 rulebook ($49.95 PDF) isn't going to lead to increased sales.
Yup, absolutely agree. Spread the word, share the video!
They've been taking their time with this propaganda edition.
Spread the word, share the video!
Because they know they won't sell almost anything... and obviously it's our fault, the consumers' fault.
An edition nobody (that matters) asked for or wanted. I think the goal here was to include anything and everything not excluded from the irrevocable OGL. The intent to claim ownership of compatible creator content hasn’t changed.
What was your favorite edition of D&D?
If you mean of official D&D products, it was the Rules Cyclopedia
@@RPGPundit I meant something like "AD&D vs. 3.5," etc. The rule cyclopedia is basic d&d. Is that your favorite version?
When you play Moldvay´s B/X you realizes 3rd to present edition is just bloat.
True, but there's different degrees of bloat.
3rd edition kind of sucked. I remember wanting to like it, trying to play it, and eventually giving up and getting into making my own systems, which also honestly kind of sucked but I was real young. LOL
I loved 3.5e, still do!
@@jeffreyquigley I know a lot of people do.
Respectfully disagree on your fighter comment.
Fighters are great early on.
But they do need something for later level play as they are often left behind by the other classes.
So they do need something beyond just being a fighter in and of itself as I've seen it happen time and again with higher level fighters as they became redundent (especially after 10th level.)
But you are right about bloat so its a balancing act to keep fighters effective without overdoing it.
Fighters in DCC and fighters in Lion & Dragon/Baptism of Fire do not get left behind, and both sets of games figure out how to do that in two totally different ways, and in both cases far better than "weapon mastery"
@@RPGPundit Your take on fighters in Baptism is interesting. Maybe its just the fact I have seen more then a few high level fighters falter (often only remaining useful because of gear) that makes me a little jaded on the fighter class. I'll consider what you said in this then.
The thing I don't agree on is the negative view of fighters with special combat moves. If you are not trained for combat, you are likely not going to do something complex under the pressure of a fight with any relevant chance of success. I think that things like throwing sand in your enemy's eyes or weighting their strength before striking are reasonable for everyone, but it's reasonable to assume you won't use any technique in fencing handbooks.
It would be better if they had a small number of actually unique and useful spells and have these kinds of manoeuvres to fighters: no rule bloat and no need for endless magical fighter subclasses to give fighters some mechanical abilities
The thing is, if you watched the video you realize I'm not saying that fighters shouldn't get to do special things. I'm saying that the way to do it with a list of special moves is the wrong way. I used DCC as an example of the RIGHT way to do this.
@@RPGPundit don't you think that fighters with different training should know different tricks?
I mean, when I wrote my game (not released, I use it at my table) it seemed reasonable to me that a centurion could do stuff to bring allies into formation, while the brute can do things like pushing and breaking stuff. That's why that idea of fighters having a list of manoeuvres doesn't seem that bad to me
@@matteonozza7236 yes, but let the players choose which they do.
Tx. A couple of subclasses they cut out were critical role favourites.
Have they stopped print on demand of greyhawk books?
Fighters might be mechanically boring. People should roleplay them differently to make up the gap.
this is why I play OSE
Play Baptism of Fire!
NOBODY Asked for a 6th Edition.
Spread the word, share the video!
I don’t mind 5e for one shots or with rpg newbs. But I’m not a big fan of the late game compared to other systems.
Hah! They're starting with the book bloat from get go.
They're not lying when they say this is just a tweaking of 5e. They have no one capable of doing anything new, much less better than 5e. So this isn't a "new edition', this is the end-stage version of 5e. I'm sure the core books will provide a boost in sales, but then in a relatively short while sales will drop again and continue to worsen.
@@RPGPundit I moved over to C&C many years ago. It's a pity that the grandaddy RPG has come to this, but Free-Will's a bitch and they made their choices.
They don’t intend to have a “book” in the end… only a “cloud”
Fighters aren't boring in Baptism of Fire.
Correct!
How are they different from anywhere else?
@@АндрейНеугодников-м6е check out the book
From what i have seen its going to be trash but im not buying anything from wizards anyway im going to play my old stuff! 🎉😎
Spread the word, share the video!
Sorry, but I like the new rules, I also like Aasimar and Goliaths being added to the PHB (although I'd add the Genasi and Gobliniods as well).
A lot of the stuff is practical like eminations as a new name for a kind of area of effect that well eminates from a particular point.
I like Weapon Mastery.
I will say the race swapped the Greyhawk Elf Queen Yan to black which is embarrassing, but at least the black wizard chick is super hot (she appears in a couple of pieces of art, she might be an Aasimar and she looks like she's from the Strixhaven school Silverquill). This is not a deal breaker for me.
Oh and its not just fighters who get Weapon Mastery.
6e apologists... [shakes head]
*emanates, *emanations
I seen those DnD pics of mexican orcs ..diverse elves and gay dwarves and wow. When you look at the art in the BECMI DnD you are inspired to game with this im inspired to throw up
Spread the word, share the video!
+1
Poor d&d getting the Wokewashing treatment
Spread the word, share the video!
Nah, having combat maneuvers is cool, it's not the problem on why dnd is bad.
Can’t you ever say anything nice. You praise all our work and criticize anyone else. How about doing something positive about products other than yours 😢
Your claims kind of fail when you're posting on a channel where I have nearly 100 reviews, many of them positive.
@@RPGPundit thank you for your feedback. I’ll just stop watching and buying your products. And yes, I have purchased a number of your products. You’ve got great talent. Thank you again for your response.
I never understand the problem people have with black women in fantasy books? First you say, it’s “woke” to have a black women because they are doing it for some sinister or other reason, they should have white dudes because that’s the demographic which plays the game. Then you lament that they are making the game more tactical so the demographic which does not play the game is being pushed out.
So, what you are saying is that they cannot show images and advertise to casuals, ie, people who don’t play the game now, and in the same breath say they are not doing enough to bring in the casuals. Thats some very interesting doublespeak there.
There's no problem with black characters. The problem is when rampant efforts at propagandistic representation take place in general. It's political, and pandering.... but not to black women (who are the tiniest of tiny fractions of D&D players) but to white left wokists, and to intentionally infuriate traditional gamers.
@@RPGPundit BS. Why would it matter that there are black characters even if they are a tiny percentage of the player base? Should all the art just depict the current player base? What nonsense. You have decided to be a culture warrior and you are titling at “woke windmills” whenever you dislike something.
@@neurolancer81It matters because it is just clumsy virtue signalling by smug pseudo-liberal white people who do not actually care/know the black people they purport to (condescendingly) represent. If Wizards brought out a campaign setting based on the 'Black Leopard, Red Wolf' & 'Moon Witch, Spider King' fantasy novels by Marlon James, THAT would be actually inclusive. But then none of the Wizards top people have even heard of those novels. None of the 19 member 'executive team' at Wizards are black. Only one is Asian. Three are women, one of whom is the Asian. So diversity is honoured in the product art, but not where it actually matters.
Nobody would have any issues with african characters if pronoun people crafted authentic african settings for them and gave them a personality however it's just not what pronoun people do they shouldn't be allowed to create an avatar of marxsism serial number #6934 dress it up as medieval European knight make it a female negroid and act outraged when people start asking questions
@@neurolancer81are you familiar with the concept of authenticity? Immersion?How about historical accuracy? All of those infinitely more important than inescapable evil of the "current year "