This training area should also include a Martial Master guy for learning to use Masteries, I wanted Monk to also have Weapon Mastery by default, you having to pick a Feat with a Mad Class to do something you should do by default is stupid
@@juliocesar6795personally I think as it stands now the base kit of monk on its own is fine without weapon Mastery but if someone were to adapt the kensei monk the subclass should absolutely have access to weapon mastery because it's the weapon using subclass
@@juliocesar6795warrior of the hand is the "unarmed strike mastery" subclass if that's something you're wanting, otherwise the mastery feat isn't a terrible feat option for you. I'd imagine if they reprint the kensei monk they would receive mastery for their kensei weapons Edit: also, the training facility does have that, you can train for the weapon mastery on a weapon with which you have proficiency
I strongly believe the carrying capacity rules are not intended to be used in combat there’s a reason every combat based spell references creature size not carrying capacity
Yeah, I do too. I only really bring them up because I've seen some other people saying that you are supposed to use them, and then trying to do all sorts of convoluted maths and assumptions to work out how heavy a creature is.
Though I also don't think we need to calculate carrying weight in the middle of combat, the rugby strategy is plain silly and having any rules-based argument against it is valuable. Sometimes shutting down a problematic player with just a "the DM said so" can create conflict, using "rules A and B block that" is much easier
@@lucasramey6427 So they have! Specifically, JC tweeted: "The rule on moving a grappled creature (PH, 195) works regardless of a creature's weight. It cares about creature size." Thanks for nudging me in the right direction.
One more tactic: move your grappled enemy into the space of a creature its size or larger. This will cause it (and potentially the creature you dragged it into) to be prone, giving it disadvantage on attacks against you. (PHB pg. 25)
Eh I could see it be argued either way because it says, "if you somehow end a turn in a space with another creature, you have the Prone condition unless you are Tiny or are of a larger size than the other creature." So I could see it be argued that it's either "you" end a turn or it's treated as a turn ends and you're in a creature's space It is cool visuals to throw someone at someone, I'd just recommend talking to your dm about it
So the reason I didn't include this is because the actual dragging rules are very weak, and I think that there's a more than strong argument to say that you probably can't force a creature into another creature's space by dragging.
My dm pointed out a good point to this. It should be treated as difficult terrain to do so, copying the ally moving through ally rule. I also think you need to shove them, simply moving them just feels silly.
Right, this is a fun one because it lets me get into speed and movement rules, which are far weirder than they have any right to be. First off, Speed and Movement are completely different things. Speed is a fixed number. On your character sheet it says that you have 30 ft. Speed. Unless something happens, you always have 30 ft. Speed, it doesn't matter if you've moved or not, your speed is 30 ft. Movement on the other hand is a cumulative number. If you move 5 ft., you have spent 5 ft. Of movement. If you then move another 10 ft., you have spent 15 ft. of movement. The only limitation on movement is that you can't spend Movement in excess of your speed. To my knowledge there are no other rules in D&D which look at your movement. Whenever a feature tells you to spend Movement equal to half your Speed, like standing, you must spend 15 because that's half of 30. If you get hit by Ray of Frost, you temporarily go down to 20 ft. Speed for one turn. On that turn only, when you stand up you must spend 10 ft., because that's half of 20. Incredibly weirdly, there are certain features like Spirit Guardians which conditionally half your Speed. In the case of Spirit Guardians, it's whilst you're in the area. That means that if you run 15 ft. before you get to the Spirit Guardians, you have to stop. It's not like Difficult Terrain where you just spend double Movement, you literally can't enter the spell. On the other hand, if you run 15 ft. to get out of Spirit Guardians, you then can continue running, because your speed returns to 30 ft., and you have only used 15 ft. of movement.
I’ve been playing a Loxodon Rune Knight grappler for a long time, with skill expert for expertise in athletics, and he doesn’t work nearly as well with the new rules. He used to be nearly unbeatable with grappling, but without any ways to improve his grappler DC besides maxing out strength, it’s hard to make him as OP of a grappler as he used to be. I am excited by the prospect of getting good use out of Shield Master and the topple mastery, I’ll just need to land my grapples to keep them down
Yeah, it's definitely a nerf to the absolute peak of grappling in 2014, but it's got a much higher floor than it had before. There are definitely more reasons for more people to attempt grapples, and more ways to do it too.
The opportunity attack that helps an ally is another thing that should probably be run by the DM before using it. I've seen debate on whether this is intended, with good points on both sides. (Even more so when combined with the Warcaster feat and buff spells.) I am hopeful that a clear ruling comes from the designers on this, and I have no confidence in predicting either way as to what that ruling would be. For now, I would probably allow the shove but disallow the buff spells. I don't have a great argument for that approach other than that I think that makes sense for balance.
They intentionally changed the wording so you could target anyone with an OA, not just hostile creatures. That's RAW--not some ambiguous homebrew or something. It was a deliberate change in the rules.
@@MeemBeen That certainly appears to be the case. And I do find that line of reasoning convincing when we are talking about Shove attacks. But I have also seen convincing arguments that they likely never anticipated or intended that, for example, somebody could use this with the Warcaster feat to Haste their ally as a reaction.
@@kcluboki mean they could sure, but that isn't overly powerful anyways. I can see the argument that they didn't anticipate it, but since it seems like very intentional language change in both areas, it's not overpowered, and it makes team synergy better, I can't think of a good reason to be against it personally
Unfortunately, the new 2024 DMG has a line about this (Ch. 1, pg. 19, "Players Exploiting the Rules", "Combat Is for Enemies"), where it seems pretty clear that tactics which involve targeting friendlies for attacks like this probably shouldn't be allowed. I feel like that should have been clarified within the wording for Opportunity Attacks itself, rather than putting the burden on the DM.
@@Ithzerian that section as i read it was more about addressing the "bag of rats" problem, not saying players can't target each other in combat. If that was your understanding, then players wouldn't be able to grapple each other to help move around the battlefield for example, bc that requires targeting your allies with an unarmed strike. That section is talking about when to allow combat abilities to apply, not to disallow targeting allies with abilities, at least as i read it. Although of course a gm can decide whatever they like, it's not overly strong, it promotes team play and buffing, i only see it as a good thing
I know you said you wouldn't go into monk features specifically, but I think it's worth pointing out the synergy between unarmed strikes and stunning strike If a creature is stunned, they automatically fail grapple and shove saves because stunned makes you auto fail both str and dex saving throws.
Stunning strike has great use for grappling, the stunned condition makes you automatically fail strength and dexterity saving throws, so that guarantees your grapple will land.
Why against the warcaster party buffs? It seems like it's only good for the game, makes the party work more together, encourages team play, takes up a valuable caster reaction, and isn't overpowered, like the rugby one can be.
Lovely video! I love what they did with monk and grappling in 2024 I think the emanation rule though is a ridiculous oversight just so that it's more "intuitive".
Yeah, I'm in general a huge fan of the new rules. With emanations, I think that the obvious fix is to just make them once per turn. That's probably what I'll end up doing.
Another intereting tactic you can use is (1) grapple someone (2) drag them into the space of another creature (3) conclude you turn and end it. The rules for moving say that if a turn ends with you somehow sharing space with another creature, you both fall prone. This is a nice way to effectively shove 2 creatures prone no save (other than the initial save to grapple one of them)
@apjapki i beg to differ. The game is famously precise about making distinction between *your turn* and *a turn*. Compare the wording of e.g. spirit guardians and sneak attack vs. the grappler feat
So first off, I disagree with apjapki, it can happen on any turn. I left this out of the video deliberately though, because the dragging rules are really weakly defined, and I think there's a strong argument to suggest that you can't drag a creature into an occupied space.
How good is the dance bard? Not sure how to build around it and still be a good Bard. The bonuses to unarmed fighting seem to only benefit the monk, not so much the Dance Bard.
I personally think that it's probably the weakest Bard, but it is still decent. My general advice would be that you should probably just treat the unarmed strikes as a bonus, rather than the main thing you're to do. The damage simply isn't good enough unless you're using stuff like Conjure Minor Elementals. If you are using Conjure Minor Elementals, then always remember that you can use Font of Inspiration to recharge your Bardic Inspiration by spending spell slots. That can be incredibly effective. I do actually have a CME Dance Bard build, although it's based on the playtest, which was a bit different. It's kind of a weird video because it was a build challenge to make the character Jiraiya from Naruto. th-cam.com/video/zUvsAv6_lys/w-d-xo.html
There's another feat that could help: Shadow-Touched. Less on a Monk, more for classes with Spell Slot. In it is Wrathful Smite, now a Necromancy Spell. Giving you an extra layer of Dodge & making it harder for them to escape a Grapple. And! Invisibility Spell ends if you make an Attack Roll when it used to be "attack".
Another good grapple subclass is the Astral Self monk subclass from tasha's cauldron of everything. Astral Arms (the level 3 feature) adds 5ft of range to unarmed strikes and gives you astral arms, the arms can make unarmed strikes and can use wisdom as the modifier for attack/damage rolls. Unfortunately the grapple range is still up to dm ruling since the range increase is only on your turn. And the wisdom modifier can't be used for grapple (tasha's cauldron came out before 2024 where monks still had to use strength for grapple checks, so I imagine if they rerelease it for 2024 they would be able to). But you get 2 more arms to make grapples with. You could of course try quad grappling and pairing up with a evocation school wizard or sorcerer with careful spell. Or you could grab someone in an astral arm to let your normal arms wield weapons. These strategies works well with a 1 level barbarian dip, you can get 2 weapon masteries for handaxe (light/vex) and knife (light/nick) which both count for monk weapons, gain rage damage on each str based hit, and the physical resistances really help with staying healthy enough to want to grapple.
12:59, does the 2024 ruleset still allow dropping items at any point in the round? If so, a Sword & Board/Duel Wielder would be able to attempt a Grapple as an Opportunity Attack while having their hands "full", although at the risk of the monster using an Object Interaction or even Weapon Equipping as part their Attack depending on the situation.
Tbf the 2014 rules were never clear on dropping something off turn. That was just something we all kind of just agreed on due to some vague tweets from Crawford regarding it not taking an object interaction to drop an item, but that doesn't mean you can do it off turn, same way raw you aren't supposed to be able to talk off turn. But it was never clear in 2014 and remains unclear now, so if your gm was fine with it in 2014 they're probably fine with it now
@collinw9792 fair point, although I believe either Crawford or Sage Advicr specifically stated it can be done off turn. Either way, it's worth asking since even what little we did have could've been changed.
@BlazeLycan neither actually as far as i can find. The sage advice compendium doesn't have it at all. Crawford has spoken about dropping items, but only so far as to say he personally wouldn't make it use action economy, and that it's not intended to use action economy, neither of which speak to whether or not it can be done with no action economy off turn, since other things that do not use economy, such as speaking, are not allowed off turn. Either way yes, worth asking, just not something to compare it to 2014, since neither rulebooks speak on it, and we've never gotten official confirmation, unless I've totally missed it and you can find it, in which case please lmk so i can know for sure lol Edit: he also only says in most cases he'd allow you to drop something without using economy, which means there are circumstances in which Crawford would, in his personal games, require economy to drop an item, so just now evidence it's just not clear at all in the rules and very much up to the GM. Something to have a conversation about imo
So in 2024, dropping an item is specifically stated to be a form of unequipping. That means that it requires your once per turn 'interaction', or for you to unequip it as part of the Attack action (A.K.A. juggling).
no do NOT ignore the carrying capacity rule. They are what protect the game from abuse like the Rugby strategy, wich is not intended and is bad for the game. See Treantmonk recent video on conjure woodland being to see an example why the rugby strategyis bad for the game.
I absolutely agree that Rugby is a problem, which is why I said multiple times to ask your DM. Personally though, I don't think that Grappling is the problem, I think the emanation spells are. Just make them once per round or something. That stops Rugby, without hurting any of the other cool stuff you can do with Grappling.
Rugby being broken isn't actually grappling that's broken, but that the change to when damaging emanations trigger makes them fundamentally broken. Treantmonk did a video explaining the problem, but emanations should be expected to have 300% contribution in the first round (ending most combat encounters), and then an additional 200% each round thereafter, trivializing any level-appropriate content.
@@the_twig131 I've changed them back to the old 2014 cheese grater rules where moving the emanation into a square doesn't do damage, and also reverted Ready Action back to needing concentration.
Woo! Self promotion opportunity! This is a question I cover in my video on Dual Wielding. th-cam.com/video/eTVL4QspQ6o/w-d-xo.html In short, you definitely need to be one of those three subclasses stated by peder. That is without a doubt a requirement. Does it actually work though? I don't think so, but I'm not confident about that. Other people like Treantmonk think it does.
Great video! It was entirely too long without getting our Dena fix! I can't wait to see more videos as the 2024 DMG becomes better available. On the Elements Monk ranged grapple, Player's Handbook (2024), page 106, Elemental Attunement, 'Reach' reads, "When you make an Unarmed Strike, your reach is 10 feet greater than normal". Page 367, Grappling, 'Escaping a Grapple.' reads "The condition also ends . . . if the distance between the Grappled target and the grappler exceeds the grapple's range." (This is confusing, as a grapple does not have an established "range" for players, and elsewhere uses "reach", leading me to believe these are just common terms.) Continuing to page 376, Unarmed Strike, establishes the base range, "within 5 feet of you" using neither range nor reach as a term. Now, for this to work, you must interpret that the grapple's range being a keyword, and established by 'snap-shotting' the reach of your Unarmed Strike when it is made, as Elemental Attunement only grants additional reach WHEN you make an Unarmed Strike, not after. This interpretation basically requires adding extra text to the rules you're adjudicating. As written, your reach would return to 5 feet immediately after you grapple them, causing them to be outside the grapple's range, and thus the grapple would immediately end. If you believe "the grapple" is something recorded when you take the Unarmed Strike's Grapple option, then the range for only that specific grapple would indeed be extended for its duration, and allow for you to, rather confusingly, have multiple Grapples active simultaneously with different reaches, each of which you would have to track independently. Due to the additional complication, I cannot believe this is intended, or implied. Of course, it's not elaborated upon, and nothing disallows the interpretation, so as always, it's up to your DM. It is INSANELY powerful if allowed. To be honest, with how crazy monks are now, and this feels REALLY WEIRD to say... I don't think monks need that. For carry and drag, that very specifically does NOT apply to grappling. First, in 2014 so far, monsters do not have a listed weight, meaning there's no clear way to adjudicate whether or not dragging any given monster is possible. This immediately tells me this interpretation is not intended or implied. But additionally, PHB page 8, 'Exceptions Supersede General Rules' explains that general rules for how things work are in effect UNLESS something more specific, I.E. not guaranteed, specifically exampled as class features and feats, contradicts them. Consequently, the rules clearly outline that carrying capacity rules do NOT affect the ability to grapple and move a target. That is definitely encapsulated in the size restriction, which suits the lack of a weight statistic for monsters. There is no logical support contained withint he rules for using the Grappled condition or Grappler feat's benefit being affected by the Carrying Capacity rule. It clearly stems from an understandable narrative question of "how can you do that?" But this is a game system. We can do that because it's a fantasy game and the rules tell us we can. Otherwise, it would put an undue burden on the DM to determine the weight of every creature any time a Grapple ensues, which would slow down combat immensely, and gatekeep important character features behind subjective judgement calls. No one questions that magic exists and can defy physics and warp reality. :P So yes, this monk that can withstand blows 30 times stronger than needed to kill any common person and punch hard enough to kill a dragon through their armor-like scales can drag around that creature that's only a few feet taller than them.
Sorry I deprived you. I was sick and couldn't record. My voice was still a bit off even when I did so sorry about that. Not too sure how much I'm going to have to say about the DMG, although I haven't properly read it yet. I'm getting a paper copy, and don't want to double buy on DDB. I've got like 3-4 videos already planned for the MM though, really looking forward to that. With regards to Elements Grapple, I probably would have written it off, if it wasn't for that DDB article, which outright recommends it as a cool combo, in it's own subsection with a big header saying "Reach Out and Grab 'Em", and says you could flavour it as "temporary ice chunks that hold your foes in place". As for carry capacities, yeah I think it's pretty clearly not intended. The old Eberon book actually has a table that you can use to calculate the average weight of an Orc. They're about 240 lbs, before considering any gear. No way are you going to tell me that my cool martial artist punchy guy can't Judo throw a CR 1/2 because they're too heavy.
@@the_twig131 No apology needed! Take your time and feel better. I'd really love to see a video about Bastions from you! Dena could have a little construction worker outfit! The article on Elements Monk is wild, but yeah, it's not in the book. I'm not going to assume it carries any weight further than one person's take. They can easily issue a digital errata at any time, so if they don't, that carries its own weight.
@@the_twig131If you look at the author of that ddb article you'll see they have made many others. Under most of them are comments correcting rulings that were got wrong and sometimes changelogs where the author has fixed the relevant sections. I assume they've been preety busy but generally I don't take any of the ddb articles as anything more than promotional fluff. Which they are.
@20Storiesunder yeah, I mentioned that they were from marketing not design in the video. It's specifically the fact that it's it's own section with a big header.
As a DM, ill definitely be nerfing the emanation spells damages to only proc one time per round. We want the caster martial divide to get smaller! Not larger, guys! 😂
I think, that the use of grappling allies and reaction attacks on allies is something that is so overpowered that it will trivialise fights. It can be fun once or twice but then what?
At a base level, using none of the Rugby stuff, it's just a bit of extra movement, at the cost of someone else's action economy. I don't think that's very powerful at all. In fact we've been doing it for years with features like Maneuvering Attack and Mantle of Inspiration. It's also definitely less powerful than those features, which can provide more movement, and come with additional bonuses. When you start including Rugby, is when it becomes a problem. In these cases the damage absolutely skyrockets. I think that the issue there though is the spells. I've not done it yet, but I expect that I'll end up just making stuff like Spirit Guardians once per round.
If the effect states "on your turn" you have an extended reach and you grapple someone and don't bring them closer they auto break out of grapple due to being outside your reach
Looking at the feature it states you only have that reach when you make the attack meaning if you grapple someone from that range they immediately break out and the reach can't be used for opportunity attacks because you don't have the reach until you make an attack and in the case of an opportunity attack they would only trigger one from leaving your regular 5ft reach
I can't really tell you how it will be interpreted by the community or your DM, because unfortunately I'm not actually omniscient, but how I interpret it is: you can have a free hand while using it. I think I like the tactical implications of grappling at range.
If you are a halfling, you should be able to run into the space of an enemy, make your push attack and push them 10 ft up. Then you move out of the way and they fall onto thr ground taking damage and falling prone
I’ve been looking into multi classing into an elemental monk to lvl 5 and rest into dance bard for a good hybrid melee/mage fighter. You get the reach and elemental strikes, flurry of blows, but your dmg die will get to d12 faster going bard and gain access to spells.
@ ah guess I should have checked my math lol, but if I understand correctly you can cast the spell fount of moonlight to add 2d6 radiant on each melee hit. So attack, extra attack, flurry of blows I think would be fun
@@aradeku8427 If you're going for font of moonlight, I would probably go druid instead. Both Monk and Druid are Widom based classes, so you can afford to take a higher Wis & Dex and still have a decent Con. With the Dance Bard Multiclass you need to decide from the outset if you are going to focus more on Wisdom or Charisma, and with the rules for Unarmored Defense, you can only get one. So either you are going to have a middling AC for while, or you will have to wait for extra attack.
@@jordanholt9170 there’s also conjure minor elementals which is also wisdom except with bards magical secrets either spell would count as a bards and then use charisma instead right? I get what your saying that Druid and monk blend together better, but I think the dance bard (which has unarmored defense with dex and cha) and elemental monk still has good synergy. Either way it adds to variety, thanks for the advice though I’ll definitely keep it in mind.
Eu não falo português, então estou usando o Google Tradutor. Desculpe se minha gramática estiver ruim. Não, os ataques de uma Forma Selvagem não são Ataques Desarmados. Você pode fazer um Ataque Desarmado em vez de usar suas garras ou algo assim. Se você for um Druida/Monge, você também pode usar uma Ação Bônus com Artes Marciais. Obrigado por comentar, fico feliz em saber que tenho espectadores internacionais.
I have a question about push. Why can't you push upwards with tavern brawler? And whats the difference with that push and the "straight away" push in the push weapon mastery? Isn't the wording weird?
@apjapki this is not a bad faith question. You are just being mean, in the video it is said that you can do it with crusher and i was asking why you can not do it just with tavern brawler. Tavern brawler and the open hand technique feature from the warrior of the open hand subclass have the same wording and in some pages in the internet (rpg bot) i have read people saying that you can do it, and also they said that you can do it with the hammering horns feature from the minotaur species. But also that you can not do it with the weapon mastery "push". I wanted to know the difference and if i was reading it wrong. Im interested on this because i want to know if my players can do it by raw and english is not my first lenguage, i don't know if there is another implication in the phrase. Do you need to get an explanation for every question you read or you are just like this?
Not a bad faith question at all, that's completely reasonable. So, first up, the reason that Crusher definitely allows you to push upwards: Most features, like Push Mastery, Unarmed Strike, Brutal Strike, Elemental Attunement, and Open Hand Technique say that they 'push away from you'. That means that they must end in a space that is further from you than where they started. Crusher on the other hand says that you 'move them to an unoccupied space'. That means that a space which is still adjacent to you is still valid, such as directly upwards. The more interesting part is why can these push effects not go diagonally up and away? I kind of don't really have anything objectively RAW for this. It's one of those things we've just sort of communally agreed. My personal reading however is that whenever something says that you must push away, it means in a straight line, starting from you and going through them. You can't do a diagonal push, or push someone to the side (although if you asked in game, I probably would let you). 2014 actually had a specific rule for this where pushing to the side gave you disadvantage on your athletics check, although that's gone now. One of the downsides to my reading is that it means that 'push away' and 'push straight away' mean the same thing. Some people argue that 'push away' allows diagonals, but 'push straight away' does not. Overall, I think that the RAW here is very weak, and it's more just a communally accepted thing that Crusher can move them up, but push effects cannot.
I think you missread the rule for push/pull. It says that if you are pushing/ pulling more than your carry capacity, then your speed is 5ft and carry capacity is 15*str. I believe that you cannot push/ pull more than 30 times your str. So in your example of 8 str, than your speed is 5 ft once you teach 121lbs, and is zero feet when you hit 241 lbs.
More that I just didn't go too deep into it, because I consider it to be a side note. I generally don't read out rules in their entirety, and instead only hit on the key points, because it makes videos flow a lot better, and just generally be a lot shorter. I probably could have added a good 10-15 minutes to the run time if I wanted to by just reading more, but I think that that would ultimately be a worse video. Instead I put the full text on the screen so you can pause if you want to. As I said though, I really don't think that those rules are intended to be used in combat with respect to grappling. The size limits cover it already.
Personally hate the change to have grappling be a saving throw. Why does everyone get to be Zangief when they've put in no investment? It makes Athletics as a skill even worse than it already was. Besides that, the disadvantage against everyone except the grappler is actually pretty cool. It makes it more explicitly a crowd control option. Edit: the saving throw thing also applies to shove, of course
Also, yes everyone can make grapples and shoves, but only characters with high strength or a monk will actually be good at it. A save still has to be made after all Now a bard or rogue can't be better than a barbarian at grappling or shoving simply by having expertise
Yeah, got to say I'm with Verdurite here. The investment is giving your character high strength and a free hand. I think that makes a lot more sense than when Bard was the best grappler.
I still have one question about unarmed strikes, what are they defined as? Does a moondruid's claw or bite count as unarmed strikes, does natural weapons like a tabaxi´s claws?
No, none of those count as an Unarmed Strike, they are natural weapons. It's not completely foolproof, but an easy way to think of it is if a feature makes you roll some dice to do damage (without relying on Martial Arts or whatever obviously), it's not an Unarmed Strike. But if you wanted to make a Tabaxi Barbarian with Grappler, I wouldn't have a problem with you using a d6. Not technically RAW, but who cares.
Not heard it said like that before, but RARan is important. Ultimately, I don't think that Rugby will actually effect most tables. I think it's probably just going to be one of those things that we scream about on the internet, like the Coffeelock. I reckon that on most tables, they either just won't do it, or will end up make the emanation spells only once per round.
How about a 6th level monk with the jump spell, doubling jump distance with a bonus action step of the wind with a focus point (60 ft) straight up with a grappled target then drop them. Slow fall @ 6x5 (-30 hp dam) is almost even with 6d6 (3.5x6=21) fall damage to you and the target + prone condition!
I thought about this (not specifically with Tekken), but there's already a D&D tactic called juggling. I was also considering "Home Run", but that seems more weapon based.
So first off, I really don't think that the carry capacity rules are intended to be used in combat with respect to grappling. I think that the size restriction rules already cover that. Off the top of your head, can you tell me how heavy an orc is? I doubt they'll be 120 lbs, so a Monk could never drag one. To give you the answer, going by the table in Eberron: Rising from the Last War, you're looking at an average of around 240 lbs, so you'd need to be at 16 STR before you can. I do not think that's intended at all. If you don't want to have Rugby in your game, I think that the obvious thing is to just say that the spells only trigger once per round. That's what I expect I'll end up doing.
While “rugby” seems like a fun tactic to optimize and use from time to time, I suspect people will grow tired of every dnd combat changing from classic fantasy sword fights and flinging spells to exclusively being hyper speed owls and monks carrying clerics and druids around in circles.
Yeah, I definitely agree. I think it's ultimately going to end up like the Coffeelock as one of these things that people freak out about on the internet, but in reality barely impacts games. Personally, I think I'll likely end up just making the emanation spells once per round.
If you remember that we only use turns to simplify what ever creature and charavter does in a 6 sec window then using rugby after a druid or cleric has already had their "turn" is stupid because essentially they are all happening at a similar time. I think it will ruin the game with thise sorts if shinnengans. On carry capacity i would worry too much about maths on the flat but if some str 8 monk tries dragging some one up a vertical cliff to drop them doing fall damage id just say sorry they exceed your carry capacity. Some times common sense should prevail over what was clearly not thpught out clearly enough with some if tge rule changes
Whoa, After go’ogling Simmy Krotiel’s latest I noticed it had undergone revisions to add 4 ins. and even more using accelerated growth techniques, after 3 ins. more I feel so huge now, thanks
I don't know if this is in the video but the Bastion, Training Area has a Unarmed Combat Expert, giving the player +1d4 to Unarmed Strikes for 7 days.
Unfortunately I recorded this before the DMG came out.
This training area should also include a Martial Master guy for learning to use Masteries, I wanted Monk to also have Weapon Mastery by default, you having to pick a Feat with a Mad Class to do something you should do by default is stupid
@@juliocesar6795personally I think as it stands now the base kit of monk on its own is fine without weapon Mastery but if someone were to adapt the kensei monk the subclass should absolutely have access to weapon mastery because it's the weapon using subclass
I like this a lot, I've always liked roleplaying my monks training in their spare time, but it never had any real mechanical benefits
@@juliocesar6795warrior of the hand is the "unarmed strike mastery" subclass if that's something you're wanting, otherwise the mastery feat isn't a terrible feat option for you. I'd imagine if they reprint the kensei monk they would receive mastery for their kensei weapons
Edit: also, the training facility does have that, you can train for the weapon mastery on a weapon with which you have proficiency
I strongly believe the carrying capacity rules are not intended to be used in combat there’s a reason every combat based spell references creature size not carrying capacity
Yeah, I do too. I only really bring them up because I've seen some other people saying that you are supposed to use them, and then trying to do all sorts of convoluted maths and assumptions to work out how heavy a creature is.
I would love to see the designers issue a clarification here to settle the question for good, one way or the other.
Though I also don't think we need to calculate carrying weight in the middle of combat, the rugby strategy is plain silly and having any rules-based argument against it is valuable.
Sometimes shutting down a problematic player with just a "the DM said so" can create conflict, using "rules A and B block that" is much easier
@@kclubokthey've made a sage advice in the past to say that carrying capacity doesn't interact with the mechanics of grappling
@@lucasramey6427 So they have! Specifically, JC tweeted: "The rule on moving a grappled creature (PH, 195) works regardless of a creature's weight. It cares about creature size." Thanks for nudging me in the right direction.
One more tactic: move your grappled enemy into the space of a creature its size or larger. This will cause it (and potentially the creature you dragged it into) to be prone, giving it disadvantage on attacks against you. (PHB pg. 25)
Eh I could see it be argued either way because it says, "if you somehow end a turn in a space with another creature, you have the Prone condition unless you are Tiny or are of a larger size than the other creature." So I could see it be argued that it's either "you" end a turn or it's treated as a turn ends and you're in a creature's space
It is cool visuals to throw someone at someone, I'd just recommend talking to your dm about it
I hit a dude with another dude!
So the reason I didn't include this is because the actual dragging rules are very weak, and I think that there's a more than strong argument to say that you probably can't force a creature into another creature's space by dragging.
My dm pointed out a good point to this. It should be treated as difficult terrain to do so, copying the ally moving through ally rule.
I also think you need to shove them, simply moving them just feels silly.
Extremely weak. @@the_twig131
Not optimal but I made a strength based Paladin dance bard with multiclassing for punch smites because you can do that now
Mind giving me a rundown of the build? I am extremely intrigued.
Sounds like the best reason
That seems like a decent build
If you want to make them optimal just get unarmed fighting style at level 2.
Sounds like you've become a Hamon user.
We're all Zangief mains now
Standing is based on the current movement you have, not your max.
Right, this is a fun one because it lets me get into speed and movement rules, which are far weirder than they have any right to be.
First off, Speed and Movement are completely different things. Speed is a fixed number. On your character sheet it says that you have 30 ft. Speed. Unless something happens, you always have 30 ft. Speed, it doesn't matter if you've moved or not, your speed is 30 ft.
Movement on the other hand is a cumulative number. If you move 5 ft., you have spent 5 ft. Of movement. If you then move another 10 ft., you have spent 15 ft. of movement. The only limitation on movement is that you can't spend Movement in excess of your speed. To my knowledge there are no other rules in D&D which look at your movement.
Whenever a feature tells you to spend Movement equal to half your Speed, like standing, you must spend 15 because that's half of 30.
If you get hit by Ray of Frost, you temporarily go down to 20 ft. Speed for one turn. On that turn only, when you stand up you must spend 10 ft., because that's half of 20.
Incredibly weirdly, there are certain features like Spirit Guardians which conditionally half your Speed. In the case of Spirit Guardians, it's whilst you're in the area. That means that if you run 15 ft. before you get to the Spirit Guardians, you have to stop. It's not like Difficult Terrain where you just spend double Movement, you literally can't enter the spell.
On the other hand, if you run 15 ft. to get out of Spirit Guardians, you then can continue running, because your speed returns to 30 ft., and you have only used 15 ft. of movement.
I’ve been playing a Loxodon Rune Knight grappler for a long time, with skill expert for expertise in athletics, and he doesn’t work nearly as well with the new rules. He used to be nearly unbeatable with grappling, but without any ways to improve his grappler DC besides maxing out strength, it’s hard to make him as OP of a grappler as he used to be. I am excited by the prospect of getting good use out of Shield Master and the topple mastery, I’ll just need to land my grapples to keep them down
Yeah, it's definitely a nerf to the absolute peak of grappling in 2014, but it's got a much higher floor than it had before. There are definitely more reasons for more people to attempt grapples, and more ways to do it too.
The opportunity attack that helps an ally is another thing that should probably be run by the DM before using it. I've seen debate on whether this is intended, with good points on both sides. (Even more so when combined with the Warcaster feat and buff spells.) I am hopeful that a clear ruling comes from the designers on this, and I have no confidence in predicting either way as to what that ruling would be. For now, I would probably allow the shove but disallow the buff spells. I don't have a great argument for that approach other than that I think that makes sense for balance.
They intentionally changed the wording so you could target anyone with an OA, not just hostile creatures. That's RAW--not some ambiguous homebrew or something. It was a deliberate change in the rules.
@@MeemBeen That certainly appears to be the case. And I do find that line of reasoning convincing when we are talking about Shove attacks. But I have also seen convincing arguments that they likely never anticipated or intended that, for example, somebody could use this with the Warcaster feat to Haste their ally as a reaction.
@@kcluboki mean they could sure, but that isn't overly powerful anyways. I can see the argument that they didn't anticipate it, but since it seems like very intentional language change in both areas, it's not overpowered, and it makes team synergy better, I can't think of a good reason to be against it personally
Unfortunately, the new 2024 DMG has a line about this (Ch. 1, pg. 19, "Players Exploiting the Rules", "Combat Is for Enemies"), where it seems pretty clear that tactics which involve targeting friendlies for attacks like this probably shouldn't be allowed. I feel like that should have been clarified within the wording for Opportunity Attacks itself, rather than putting the burden on the DM.
@@Ithzerian that section as i read it was more about addressing the "bag of rats" problem, not saying players can't target each other in combat. If that was your understanding, then players wouldn't be able to grapple each other to help move around the battlefield for example, bc that requires targeting your allies with an unarmed strike. That section is talking about when to allow combat abilities to apply, not to disallow targeting allies with abilities, at least as i read it. Although of course a gm can decide whatever they like, it's not overly strong, it promotes team play and buffing, i only see it as a good thing
I know you said you wouldn't go into monk features specifically, but I think it's worth pointing out the synergy between unarmed strikes and stunning strike
If a creature is stunned, they automatically fail grapple and shove saves because stunned makes you auto fail both str and dex saving throws.
On top of that, if the target makes the save, the halved speed will make it harder for them to deal with the prone condition
Awesome video
that was potentially the funniest opening line of a TH-cam video I've ever heard. Caught me _incredibly_ off-guard.
Stunning strike has great use for grappling, the stunned condition makes you automatically fail strength and dexterity saving throws, so that guarantees your grapple will land.
I will ABSOLUTELY NOT be allowing “opportunity attacks” against allies in my game.
And no rugby tactics. It instantly ruins the game.
Why against the warcaster party buffs? It seems like it's only good for the game, makes the party work more together, encourages team play, takes up a valuable caster reaction, and isn't overpowered, like the rugby one can be.
Get good.
Lovely video! I love what they did with monk and grappling in 2024
I think the emanation rule though is a ridiculous oversight just so that it's more "intuitive".
Yeah, I'm in general a huge fan of the new rules.
With emanations, I think that the obvious fix is to just make them once per turn. That's probably what I'll end up doing.
LOTR: Nobody tosses a dwarf!
D&D: dwarf tossing rules
Another intereting tactic you can use is (1) grapple someone (2) drag them into the space of another creature (3) conclude you turn and end it. The rules for moving say that if a turn ends with you somehow sharing space with another creature, you both fall prone. This is a nice way to effectively shove 2 creatures prone no save (other than the initial save to grapple one of them)
@apjapki i beg to differ. The game is famously precise about making distinction between *your turn* and *a turn*. Compare the wording of e.g. spirit guardians and sneak attack vs. the grappler feat
So first off, I disagree with apjapki, it can happen on any turn.
I left this out of the video deliberately though, because the dragging rules are really weakly defined, and I think there's a strong argument to suggest that you can't drag a creature into an occupied space.
How good is the dance bard? Not sure how to build around it and still be a good Bard. The bonuses to unarmed fighting seem to only benefit the monk, not so much the Dance Bard.
I personally think that it's probably the weakest Bard, but it is still decent.
My general advice would be that you should probably just treat the unarmed strikes as a bonus, rather than the main thing you're to do. The damage simply isn't good enough unless you're using stuff like Conjure Minor Elementals.
If you are using Conjure Minor Elementals, then always remember that you can use Font of Inspiration to recharge your Bardic Inspiration by spending spell slots. That can be incredibly effective.
I do actually have a CME Dance Bard build, although it's based on the playtest, which was a bit different. It's kind of a weird video because it was a build challenge to make the character Jiraiya from Naruto.
th-cam.com/video/zUvsAv6_lys/w-d-xo.html
There's another feat that could help: Shadow-Touched. Less on a Monk, more for classes with Spell Slot. In it is Wrathful Smite, now a Necromancy Spell. Giving you an extra layer of Dodge & making it harder for them to escape a Grapple.
And! Invisibility Spell ends if you make an Attack Roll when it used to be "attack".
Another good grapple subclass is the Astral Self monk subclass from tasha's cauldron of everything. Astral Arms (the level 3 feature) adds 5ft of range to unarmed strikes and gives you astral arms, the arms can make unarmed strikes and can use wisdom as the modifier for attack/damage rolls.
Unfortunately the grapple range is still up to dm ruling since the range increase is only on your turn. And the wisdom modifier can't be used for grapple (tasha's cauldron came out before 2024 where monks still had to use strength for grapple checks, so I imagine if they rerelease it for 2024 they would be able to).
But you get 2 more arms to make grapples with. You could of course try quad grappling and pairing up with a evocation school wizard or sorcerer with careful spell. Or you could grab someone in an astral arm to let your normal arms wield weapons.
These strategies works well with a 1 level barbarian dip, you can get 2 weapon masteries for handaxe (light/vex) and knife (light/nick) which both count for monk weapons, gain rage damage on each str based hit, and the physical resistances really help with staying healthy enough to want to grapple.
Astral Self Bugbears gets even more reach with their perfect for basketball physique.
12:59, does the 2024 ruleset still allow dropping items at any point in the round? If so, a Sword & Board/Duel Wielder would be able to attempt a Grapple as an Opportunity Attack while having their hands "full", although at the risk of the monster using an Object Interaction or even Weapon Equipping as part their Attack depending on the situation.
Tbf the 2014 rules were never clear on dropping something off turn. That was just something we all kind of just agreed on due to some vague tweets from Crawford regarding it not taking an object interaction to drop an item, but that doesn't mean you can do it off turn, same way raw you aren't supposed to be able to talk off turn. But it was never clear in 2014 and remains unclear now, so if your gm was fine with it in 2014 they're probably fine with it now
@collinw9792 fair point, although I believe either Crawford or Sage Advicr specifically stated it can be done off turn.
Either way, it's worth asking since even what little we did have could've been changed.
@BlazeLycan neither actually as far as i can find. The sage advice compendium doesn't have it at all. Crawford has spoken about dropping items, but only so far as to say he personally wouldn't make it use action economy, and that it's not intended to use action economy, neither of which speak to whether or not it can be done with no action economy off turn, since other things that do not use economy, such as speaking, are not allowed off turn. Either way yes, worth asking, just not something to compare it to 2014, since neither rulebooks speak on it, and we've never gotten official confirmation, unless I've totally missed it and you can find it, in which case please lmk so i can know for sure lol
Edit: he also only says in most cases he'd allow you to drop something without using economy, which means there are circumstances in which Crawford would, in his personal games, require economy to drop an item, so just now evidence it's just not clear at all in the rules and very much up to the GM. Something to have a conversation about imo
So in 2024, dropping an item is specifically stated to be a form of unequipping. That means that it requires your once per turn 'interaction', or for you to unequip it as part of the Attack action (A.K.A. juggling).
@@the_twig131 which means it cannot be done off-turn unless it is a Readied Attack action. :(
no do NOT ignore the carrying capacity rule. They are what protect the game from abuse like the Rugby strategy, wich is not intended and is bad for the game. See Treantmonk recent video on conjure woodland being to see an example why the rugby strategyis bad for the game.
I absolutely agree that Rugby is a problem, which is why I said multiple times to ask your DM. Personally though, I don't think that Grappling is the problem, I think the emanation spells are. Just make them once per round or something. That stops Rugby, without hurting any of the other cool stuff you can do with Grappling.
Rugby being broken isn't actually grappling that's broken, but that the change to when damaging emanations trigger makes them fundamentally broken.
Treantmonk did a video explaining the problem, but emanations should be expected to have 300% contribution in the first round (ending most combat encounters), and then an additional 200% each round thereafter, trivializing any level-appropriate content.
Yeah, I'm entirely of the same opinion. I expect that I personally will probably end up making the Emanations only once per round or something.
@@the_twig131Same.
@@the_twig131 I've changed them back to the old 2014 cheese grater rules where moving the emanation into a square doesn't do damage, and also reverted Ready Action back to needing concentration.
On dual-wielding: Does Shaleilah in one hand plus True Strike with Scimitar on the other hand, trigger Nick property?
The Nick property only works as part of the attack action, so unless you’re an Eldritch Knight, Valor Bard, or a Bladesinger, no this doesn’t work.
@pederw4900 ok, so in these 3 cases, it works, right?
Woo! Self promotion opportunity!
This is a question I cover in my video on Dual Wielding.
th-cam.com/video/eTVL4QspQ6o/w-d-xo.html
In short, you definitely need to be one of those three subclasses stated by peder. That is without a doubt a requirement. Does it actually work though? I don't think so, but I'm not confident about that. Other people like Treantmonk think it does.
Great video! It was entirely too long without getting our Dena fix! I can't wait to see more videos as the 2024 DMG becomes better available.
On the Elements Monk ranged grapple, Player's Handbook (2024), page 106, Elemental Attunement, 'Reach' reads, "When you make an Unarmed Strike, your reach is 10 feet greater than normal". Page 367, Grappling, 'Escaping a Grapple.' reads "The condition also ends . . . if the distance between the Grappled target and the grappler exceeds the grapple's range." (This is confusing, as a grapple does not have an established "range" for players, and elsewhere uses "reach", leading me to believe these are just common terms.) Continuing to page 376, Unarmed Strike, establishes the base range, "within 5 feet of you" using neither range nor reach as a term. Now, for this to work, you must interpret that the grapple's range being a keyword, and established by 'snap-shotting' the reach of your Unarmed Strike when it is made, as Elemental Attunement only grants additional reach WHEN you make an Unarmed Strike, not after. This interpretation basically requires adding extra text to the rules you're adjudicating. As written, your reach would return to 5 feet immediately after you grapple them, causing them to be outside the grapple's range, and thus the grapple would immediately end. If you believe "the grapple" is something recorded when you take the Unarmed Strike's Grapple option, then the range for only that specific grapple would indeed be extended for its duration, and allow for you to, rather confusingly, have multiple Grapples active simultaneously with different reaches, each of which you would have to track independently. Due to the additional complication, I cannot believe this is intended, or implied. Of course, it's not elaborated upon, and nothing disallows the interpretation, so as always, it's up to your DM. It is INSANELY powerful if allowed. To be honest, with how crazy monks are now, and this feels REALLY WEIRD to say... I don't think monks need that.
For carry and drag, that very specifically does NOT apply to grappling. First, in 2014 so far, monsters do not have a listed weight, meaning there's no clear way to adjudicate whether or not dragging any given monster is possible. This immediately tells me this interpretation is not intended or implied. But additionally, PHB page 8, 'Exceptions Supersede General Rules' explains that general rules for how things work are in effect UNLESS something more specific, I.E. not guaranteed, specifically exampled as class features and feats, contradicts them. Consequently, the rules clearly outline that carrying capacity rules do NOT affect the ability to grapple and move a target. That is definitely encapsulated in the size restriction, which suits the lack of a weight statistic for monsters. There is no logical support contained withint he rules for using the Grappled condition or Grappler feat's benefit being affected by the Carrying Capacity rule. It clearly stems from an understandable narrative question of "how can you do that?" But this is a game system. We can do that because it's a fantasy game and the rules tell us we can. Otherwise, it would put an undue burden on the DM to determine the weight of every creature any time a Grapple ensues, which would slow down combat immensely, and gatekeep important character features behind subjective judgement calls. No one questions that magic exists and can defy physics and warp reality. :P So yes, this monk that can withstand blows 30 times stronger than needed to kill any common person and punch hard enough to kill a dragon through their armor-like scales can drag around that creature that's only a few feet taller than them.
Sorry I deprived you. I was sick and couldn't record. My voice was still a bit off even when I did so sorry about that. Not too sure how much I'm going to have to say about the DMG, although I haven't properly read it yet. I'm getting a paper copy, and don't want to double buy on DDB. I've got like 3-4 videos already planned for the MM though, really looking forward to that.
With regards to Elements Grapple, I probably would have written it off, if it wasn't for that DDB article, which outright recommends it as a cool combo, in it's own subsection with a big header saying "Reach Out and Grab 'Em", and says you could flavour it as "temporary ice chunks that hold your foes in place".
As for carry capacities, yeah I think it's pretty clearly not intended. The old Eberon book actually has a table that you can use to calculate the average weight of an Orc. They're about 240 lbs, before considering any gear. No way are you going to tell me that my cool martial artist punchy guy can't Judo throw a CR 1/2 because they're too heavy.
@@the_twig131 No apology needed! Take your time and feel better.
I'd really love to see a video about Bastions from you! Dena could have a little construction worker outfit!
The article on Elements Monk is wild, but yeah, it's not in the book. I'm not going to assume it carries any weight further than one person's take. They can easily issue a digital errata at any time, so if they don't, that carries its own weight.
@@the_twig131If you look at the author of that ddb article you'll see they have made many others. Under most of them are comments correcting rulings that were got wrong and sometimes changelogs where the author has fixed the relevant sections.
I assume they've been preety busy but generally I don't take any of the ddb articles as anything more than promotional fluff. Which they are.
@20Storiesunder yeah, I mentioned that they were from marketing not design in the video. It's specifically the fact that it's it's own section with a big header.
@@the_twig131 If I had to guess why it's it's own section is that the author misunderstood the rule and got very excited xD
As a DM, ill definitely be nerfing the emanation spells damages to only proc one time per round.
We want the caster martial divide to get smaller! Not larger, guys! 😂
Yeah, I expect that I will too.
I think, that the use of grappling allies and reaction attacks on allies is something that is so overpowered that it will trivialise fights. It can be fun once or twice but then what?
At a base level, using none of the Rugby stuff, it's just a bit of extra movement, at the cost of someone else's action economy. I don't think that's very powerful at all. In fact we've been doing it for years with features like Maneuvering Attack and Mantle of Inspiration. It's also definitely less powerful than those features, which can provide more movement, and come with additional bonuses.
When you start including Rugby, is when it becomes a problem. In these cases the damage absolutely skyrockets. I think that the issue there though is the spells. I've not done it yet, but I expect that I'll end up just making stuff like Spirit Guardians once per round.
Elemental Attunement says ....AS ELEMENTAL ENERGY EXTENDING FROM YOU. and Grappling says Need a Free Hand. how will this be Interpreted?
If the effect states "on your turn" you have an extended reach and you grapple someone and don't bring them closer they auto break out of grapple due to being outside your reach
Looking at the feature it states you only have that reach when you make the attack meaning if you grapple someone from that range they immediately break out and the reach can't be used for opportunity attacks because you don't have the reach until you make an attack and in the case of an opportunity attack they would only trigger one from leaving your regular 5ft reach
I can't really tell you how it will be interpreted by the community or your DM, because unfortunately I'm not actually omniscient, but how I interpret it is: you can have a free hand while using it.
I think I like the tactical implications of grappling at range.
If you are a halfling, you should be able to run into the space of an enemy, make your push attack and push them 10 ft up. Then you move out of the way and they fall onto thr ground taking damage and falling prone
Fantastic breakdown. Learned some great things!
(Love the Pokémon Coliseum music, by the way...or is it Gale of Darkness? Either way.)
The music is in both games i think. It's the Cypher Lab. I've had it in my library for a while, and just not found the chance to use it until now.
I’ve been looking into multi classing into an elemental monk to lvl 5 and rest into dance bard for a good hybrid melee/mage fighter. You get the reach and elemental strikes, flurry of blows, but your dmg die will get to d12 faster going bard and gain access to spells.
You would reach d12 damage die at level 20 with the bard multi class, but level 17 if you stay straight monk.
@ ah guess I should have checked my math lol, but if I understand correctly you can cast the spell fount of moonlight to add 2d6 radiant on each melee hit. So attack, extra attack, flurry of blows I think would be fun
@@aradeku8427 If you're going for font of moonlight, I would probably go druid instead. Both Monk and Druid are Widom based classes, so you can afford to take a higher Wis & Dex and still have a decent Con. With the Dance Bard Multiclass you need to decide from the outset if you are going to focus more on Wisdom or Charisma, and with the rules for Unarmored Defense, you can only get one. So either you are going to have a middling AC for while, or you will have to wait for extra attack.
@@jordanholt9170 there’s also conjure minor elementals which is also wisdom except with bards magical secrets either spell would count as a bards and then use charisma instead right? I get what your saying that Druid and monk blend together better, but I think the dance bard (which has unarmored defense with dex and cha) and elemental monk still has good synergy. Either way it adds to variety, thanks for the advice though I’ll definitely keep it in mind.
Os ataques em forma selvagem do Druida funciona para usar os recursos do ataque desarmado?
Eu não falo português, então estou usando o Google Tradutor. Desculpe se minha gramática estiver ruim.
Não, os ataques de uma Forma Selvagem não são Ataques Desarmados. Você pode fazer um Ataque Desarmado em vez de usar suas garras ou algo assim. Se você for um Druida/Monge, você também pode usar uma Ação Bônus com Artes Marciais.
Obrigado por comentar, fico feliz em saber que tenho espectadores internacionais.
I have a question about push.
Why can't you push upwards with tavern brawler? And whats the difference with that push and the "straight away" push in the push weapon mastery? Isn't the wording weird?
@apjapki this is not a bad faith question. You are just being mean, in the video it is said that you can do it with crusher and i was asking why you can not do it just with tavern brawler.
Tavern brawler and the open hand technique feature from the warrior of the open hand subclass have the same wording and in some pages in the internet (rpg bot) i have read people saying that you can do it, and also they said that you can do it with the hammering horns feature from the minotaur species. But also that you can not do it with the weapon mastery "push".
I wanted to know the difference and if i was reading it wrong. Im interested on this because i want to know if my players can do it by raw and english is not my first lenguage, i don't know if there is another implication in the phrase.
Do you need to get an explanation for every question you read or you are just like this?
@apjapki do you work for them?
@apjapki That question has nothing to do with what I asked. I was talking about the push mechanic, not movement
Not a bad faith question at all, that's completely reasonable.
So, first up, the reason that Crusher definitely allows you to push upwards:
Most features, like Push Mastery, Unarmed Strike, Brutal Strike, Elemental Attunement, and Open Hand Technique say that they 'push away from you'. That means that they must end in a space that is further from you than where they started. Crusher on the other hand says that you 'move them to an unoccupied space'. That means that a space which is still adjacent to you is still valid, such as directly upwards.
The more interesting part is why can these push effects not go diagonally up and away? I kind of don't really have anything objectively RAW for this. It's one of those things we've just sort of communally agreed. My personal reading however is that whenever something says that you must push away, it means in a straight line, starting from you and going through them. You can't do a diagonal push, or push someone to the side (although if you asked in game, I probably would let you). 2014 actually had a specific rule for this where pushing to the side gave you disadvantage on your athletics check, although that's gone now.
One of the downsides to my reading is that it means that 'push away' and 'push straight away' mean the same thing. Some people argue that 'push away' allows diagonals, but 'push straight away' does not.
Overall, I think that the RAW here is very weak, and it's more just a communally accepted thing that Crusher can move them up, but push effects cannot.
@@the_twig131 thank you for the answer and not being mean. I think that will rule it the same way as you, but i need to test it
I think you missread the rule for push/pull. It says that if you are pushing/ pulling more than your carry capacity, then your speed is 5ft and carry capacity is 15*str.
I believe that you cannot push/ pull more than 30 times your str.
So in your example of 8 str, than your speed is 5 ft once you teach 121lbs, and is zero feet when you hit 241 lbs.
More that I just didn't go too deep into it, because I consider it to be a side note. I generally don't read out rules in their entirety, and instead only hit on the key points, because it makes videos flow a lot better, and just generally be a lot shorter. I probably could have added a good 10-15 minutes to the run time if I wanted to by just reading more, but I think that that would ultimately be a worse video. Instead I put the full text on the screen so you can pause if you want to.
As I said though, I really don't think that those rules are intended to be used in combat with respect to grappling. The size limits cover it already.
Personally hate the change to have grappling be a saving throw. Why does everyone get to be Zangief when they've put in no investment? It makes Athletics as a skill even worse than it already was.
Besides that, the disadvantage against everyone except the grappler is actually pretty cool. It makes it more explicitly a crowd control option.
Edit: the saving throw thing also applies to shove, of course
Tbf, it helps monks be the best at grappling, since stunning strike makes a target auto fail both dex and str saves
Also, yes everyone can make grapples and shoves, but only characters with high strength or a monk will actually be good at it. A save still has to be made after all
Now a bard or rogue can't be better than a barbarian at grappling or shoving simply by having expertise
Yeah, got to say I'm with Verdurite here. The investment is giving your character high strength and a free hand. I think that makes a lot more sense than when Bard was the best grappler.
I still have one question about unarmed strikes, what are they defined as? Does a moondruid's claw or bite count as unarmed strikes, does natural weapons like a tabaxi´s claws?
No, none of those count as an Unarmed Strike, they are natural weapons. It's not completely foolproof, but an easy way to think of it is if a feature makes you roll some dice to do damage (without relying on Martial Arts or whatever obviously), it's not an Unarmed Strike.
But if you wanted to make a Tabaxi Barbarian with Grappler, I wouldn't have a problem with you using a d6. Not technically RAW, but who cares.
I did like the 3 states, RAW, RAI and RARan.
Not heard it said like that before, but RARan is important. Ultimately, I don't think that Rugby will actually effect most tables. I think it's probably just going to be one of those things that we scream about on the internet, like the Coffeelock.
I reckon that on most tables, they either just won't do it, or will end up make the emanation spells only once per round.
I hear Transistor music! 🩵
I've been wanting to put some Bastion or Transistor music in a video for ages. Not really found a good chance until now.
Hey Twig.
How about a 6th level monk with the jump spell, doubling jump distance with a bonus action step of the wind with a focus point (60 ft) straight up with a grappled target then drop them. Slow fall @ 6x5 (-30 hp dam) is almost even with 6d6 (3.5x6=21) fall damage to you and the target + prone condition!
Yeah, sounds good.
The drop? Don't you mean Tekken juggling
I thought about this (not specifically with Tekken), but there's already a D&D tactic called juggling. I was also considering "Home Run", but that seems more weapon based.
you said Rugby in DnD?? Automatically a like and subscribe
BTW - rugby tactics don’t work. Carry capacity is 15 lbs x STR score. If it’s more than that, you can only drag 5 feet per turn.
So first off, I really don't think that the carry capacity rules are intended to be used in combat with respect to grappling. I think that the size restriction rules already cover that. Off the top of your head, can you tell me how heavy an orc is? I doubt they'll be 120 lbs, so a Monk could never drag one.
To give you the answer, going by the table in Eberron: Rising from the Last War, you're looking at an average of around 240 lbs, so you'd need to be at 16 STR before you can. I do not think that's intended at all.
If you don't want to have Rugby in your game, I think that the obvious thing is to just say that the spells only trigger once per round. That's what I expect I'll end up doing.
While “rugby” seems like a fun tactic to optimize and use from time to time, I suspect people will grow tired of every dnd combat changing from classic fantasy sword fights and flinging spells to exclusively being hyper speed owls and monks carrying clerics and druids around in circles.
Yeah, I definitely agree. I think it's ultimately going to end up like the Coffeelock as one of these things that people freak out about on the internet, but in reality barely impacts games.
Personally, I think I'll likely end up just making the emanation spells once per round.
I mean it's already been like that if you've been paying attention to the rules
If you remember that we only use turns to simplify what ever creature and charavter does in a 6 sec window then using rugby after a druid or cleric has already had their "turn" is stupid because essentially they are all happening at a similar time. I think it will ruin the game with thise sorts if shinnengans. On carry capacity i would worry too much about maths on the flat but if some str 8 monk tries dragging some one up a vertical cliff to drop them doing fall damage id just say sorry they exceed your carry capacity. Some times common sense should prevail over what was clearly not thpught out clearly enough with some if tge rule changes
Whoa, After go’ogling Simmy Krotiel’s latest I noticed it had undergone revisions to add 4 ins. and even more using accelerated growth techniques, after 3 ins. more I feel so huge now, thanks
Curling mentioned!!! 🥌 🥌🥌
It's such a good sport.
I will ABSOLUTELY NOT be allowing “opportunity attacks” against allies in my game.
And no rugby tactics. It instantly ruins the game.