Also, I think part of the problem with the adoption of ToV rates too is also because of a few issues (at least that I have observed): 1) Firstly, and I feel this is the biggie, most people are probably waiting for physical books to arrive. This is mostly for people playing in person, but also gives the table a chance to share books and not get pegged for sharing the PDFs all over (there's sometimes that one bad apple in the group that starts sending around copies against the wishes of the original PDF purchaser, and soon you got people sharing it around to many other people than originally intended). This also prevents people from being tied to their electronics at the table. 2) Lack of digital tools at the moment. You have to admit, DnD Beyond was a game changer for robust character creation in the early days and the ability to add books and "share" them within campaigns. Sure you can buy the ToV books on Shard or get the ToV SRD to create characters or use the premades on the ToV site, but people are probably waiting for more robust tools. 3) Waiting for the official release of the VTT, I know it hasn't come out for Foundry (not sure for Roll20 or any others outside of the rules on Shard), and that is definitely putting a tamper on me and others introducing it to players and such. 4) There is still about 3 to 4 months to wait for the GM's Guide, which, maybe some people might be waiting for to have all 3 core books to get going, some people are weird like that. 5) When they launched the campaign, we (who were impacted or knew people who were) were fresh off the heels of the OGL kerfuffle. So our wallets were open for a way to show WotC that our money could be moved to other games that were not Hasbro owned. It was a way for us to have our cake and eat it too, to play 5e in a slightly newer way and not have Hasbro ruffling through our pockets for loose change. 6) Summer is here, most people are gearing up for conventions, doing vacations, being outside a lot more, not having school, and such. This is probably pretty minor, but still a factor, I feel. 7) Lastly, we have had a few other RPGs pop up since the start of the ToV Kickstarter. DC20 & MCDM both of which are in alpha/pre-alpha states. Daggerheart had their beta pop up in March and it looks pretty solid and seems to be working with the community to make a great game and there are a lot of Critical Role fans (Critters) that will follow the team to whatever system they are playing. Pathfinder 2e had a remaster that happened at the end of 2023. Stormlight Archive RPG might be looking to get a piece of the action with its fundraising happening in August. And D&D 5e 2024 edition has been going hard with their marketing and hype since the end of May. That's not to discount other great recent RPGs out there like Level Up's Advanced 5e, Knave 2e, Shadowdark, Cairn 2e, Kobolds Ate My Baby (Orange Book), Dragonbane, Eat the Reich, Shadow of the Weird Wizard, Shadow of the Demon Lord, Land of Eem, Vaesen, Call of Cthulhu, OSR and OSE titles, Savage World, Index Card RPG, EZd6, Crown and Bone, those that are holding on to their older 1e, 2e, and 3e D&D books and running games in those systems, and a slew of others. Once the physical books and the VTT support and more digital tools start to come out from Kobold Press, I think you are going to start seeing more momentum. Although, that might also be bad timing on Kobold Press' part (though no fault of their own), the last core book Tov's GM's Guide is due in September (soft and could be pushed), which is also the date of the initial new 5e books (PHB Sept 17th) are coming out. 5e 2024 isn't a total new rules set, it can slot right in with the 2014 5e rules and people can just adopt the new player characters and wait for the new monsters coming in early 2025 (Feb 18th), or just stick with slotting in Tome of Beasts, Flee Mortals, or Advanced 5e monsters to provide a better challenge to the more beefy characters. ToV can slip in and possible slough off some D&D gamers looking for a non-WotC 5e variant without having to further support WotC/Hasbro, but need to have books in hand, hit their GM Guide release in September, and have their digital tools running smooth as I'm sure WotC is going to fumble a bit at launch. I do agree with you that there are some great ToV rules and could not fault you in your top 5 list of great changes over current 5e, but will it be enough that will get people to move over and/or compare it to the 2024 5e changes that are being shown now and survived playtest? Who knows? D&D is the 800-pound RPG in the room, and there is no ignoring it when TTRPGs are brought up.
First of all, I want to thank you for your detailed reply! You make a lot of great points, and I agree that a lot of the quiet reception is due to timing and competition. The VTT release schedule is definitely slowing me down. I'm typically a Foundry guy, and I picked the Foundry pledge of the ToV Kickstarter, but that piece hasn't been released yet. The ToV system is there, but the books aren't live yet, so you can only access the basics. I have a feeling that D&D is moving toward being the Kleenex of 5E. They might have the biggest market share, and we might even SAY we're playing D&D when we talk about game night, but a lot of us are going to be playing another version - just like people ask for Kleenex, but pick up another brand when they actually get to the store. Only time will tell, but I distinctly remember playing "D&D" back in 2013 or so, but it was totally Pathfinder with a bunch of prestige classes from 3.5. In the end, I'll probably end up running some kind of 5E abomination that steals from multiple variations of 5E (the same way I played Pathfinder + 3.5 + random 3rd party d20 products back when 4E was the dominant D&D game), and I know I'll be keeping a lot of rules from Tales of the Valiant in the 5E version of that mashup.
@@CopperDragonGames I agree with your assessment of just saying D&D rather than TTRPG, D&D has become as ubiquitous with the likes of Kleenex, Xerox, and Band-Aid, and probably not moving there, but is actually there. No matter what game you play, it just gives an easy way to give the "normies" something to hold on to: funny dice, character sheets, imagination, and a person directing the adversaries and challenges to be faced. More than likely, someone has seen it in mainstream media, be it in a comicbook (Rick and Morty), a cartoon (Gravity Falls, Dungeons and Dragons [1983], Futurama), a TV show (Stranger Things, Big Bang Theory), a movie (Honor Among Thieves, E.T., Onward), video games (Baldur's Gate 3), or knows/knew someone who played/plays (some form of) it. I also agree we all play our own way, we have homebrewed 5e so much within my group that we play with some stuff from BG3, crafting and gathering rules from Hamund's Harvesting Handbook, use the clocks system and a little of the flashback rules from Blades in the Dark, and nix some overpowered (gamebreaking) combos, making it wholly our game at our table. I do like the Doom and Luck point system in ToV and might use those games that I run after we get done with the campaign we are in the middle of (and can get buy in from the players). I already use the tougher monsters (better monsters for their CR?) from the various TOB books, Flee Mortals, and Advanced 5e, with a nod toward Forge of Foes by Mike Shea to tweak and homebrew stuff I cannot find. What works at my table may not work for your table and vice versa, and that's okay. I think every table plays it slightly different and as long as they are being good stewards of TTRPGs, then game on!
Fun to see Dragonbane mentioned for once, feel like that one similarly really flew under the radar of a lot of people but Free League has put out banger after banger and that one is no exception. And just to strengthen the first point in your reply to CDG, even when i do see posts about it being played by acquantances online it's often still being refered to as "DnD"(tho that may be partly due to me being a swede and the swedish name being DoD lol)
@@LordZeebee Funny you mention it, just got my physical copy of Dragonbane in today (taking advantage of the sale on Free League's site as I write this). I also got Vaesen, which was my main reason for hopping on the sale, after the disappointment I felt with Candela Obscura's rules. I heard many good things about Dragonbane and it's on top of my "to-read-next" pile when I am done with my current reading. When I was mentioning other games, I glossed over many other titles (Numenera and Worlds Without Number come to mind and I could pile one a pile of one page RPGs, lots of obscure indie titles, and I'm sure other great games on my shelves (and thumb drive) that are just waiting for the right group), there are many titles to play and that work well to fill that not "WotC's D&D" void that many people have been creating since the OGL disaster.
I can concur, I am one who has the PDF but waiting for the physical book to arrive before really diving into it. I guess technically i don’t have the PDF yet. Have my link to download it and just haven’t bc i want the physical book.
I think a lot of us jumped onboard with anything that wasn't Wizards D&D because we were so angry with Wizards. I anger-bought a pile of PF2 books and jumped onto ToV with both feet, just because it wasn't Wizards. I am still done with Wizards, and I'm thrilled that I got into PF2, but I haven't looked into ToV yet. I have had the PDFs for two months and just haven't spent any real time with them. I need to. Thanks for this.
You are most welcome. I also tried to get into PF2E, but as much as I love the character building, I didn't fall in love with the actual gameplay. (To be fair, I think it had more to do with the two GMs I played with rather than the mechanics). For running games, I want to stick closer to what I've gotten most comfortable with over the years, which is 5E. Not judging anyone for moving onto other systems, but I love 5E, and this is a GREAT sidestep.
@CopperDragonGames Mind you, I have only played 5e twice, and used to play 1st / 2nd back in the 80s, and then switched to GURPS. That being said, I always have thought D&D's combat was boring... like 5e especially. Adding in the flair of being able to target and lop off limbs that GURPS has, is amazing. We did play PF2e for quite some time, and the tactics just never took hold enough, it was more exciting than the times I played 5e, but definitely not as cool as GURPS. Pf1e, was decent, though a lot if that was due to having a great GM.
Got my copy of ToV yesterday. Super happy about it, reading through it now, ready to start a game soon (I've been playing the Alpha release for a while, but I'm eager to start playing the "real" version).
I skimmed it s little, will readily admit I didn't do more, and I did look in detail at Sorcerer. My impression: they copy/pasted 5e and then made a few changes. Not enough to get me excited. I should go back and do a more detailed read to see if they've fixed some of the problems, though, as there still a call to play 5e at my table, and having some well-done fixes to serious problems that I don't have time to fix myself - like CR - sure would be nice. I'm just not excited by what I've seen. I will also admit, I haven't seen a lot. I think they were trying to do what Pathfinder 1 did for 3.5. Since lightning DOESN'T only strike once, maybe they'll succeed, but Paizo wrote their own, and this seems copied with some rewording. Probably just an impression, though. Kobold does good stuff. I think part of its success or failure will be dependent on whether the other major "replacements" for 5e scratch the right itch for people, and that will vary by individual. 5e was a gateway for a lot of people, and people have different reasons for wanting to move on from 5e. Those who like 5e fine but want the bugs fixed, or who love 5e but hate the company, will find a lot to love. If you genuinely want something different, this is ntmot for you. Daggerheart is far more narrative driven, DC20 and MCDM go in opposite directions with aspects of being an action rpg versus being a tactical rpg, and they all make significant changes to the classic D&D formula. The closest to the formula other than Black Flag/Tales of the Valiant, would be Pathfinder 2, but the dizzying array of character options and huge numbers can be intomidating - the math is tight, though. The proce tag, though.... five $60 hardcovers isn't spare change! But i think Tlaes of the Valiant earns a place in the market - a market I'm glad to see diversifying.
I am glad to see the market diversifying as well, and I agree on many of your points. Your take on the sorcerer is pretty accurate. ToV is decidedly not a full-on overhaul of 5E. It's a nuanced upgrade to a very familiar framework. I love that it changes some things I didn't like, but it kept the things I loved intact.
There is an actual play that uses Tales of the Valiant as its system: Roll for InitiaGive here on youtube, on Forrest Valkai’s channel. That’s at least something, I guess.
I will say that I'm happy with ToV overall; I feel like I did when Pathfinder first came out, and streamlined 3.5. My group is committed to not giving Wizards any more money, so I think we're switching to ToV for our next campaign
Totally on board with this sentiment. I'm not fully boycotting WotC anymore, but if I can find a similar or better product from Kobold Press (or any other 3rd party publisher), I lean toward supporting the underdog.
There are three big problems for TotV. First off, most of the excitement was based on hate for WotC which isn't sustainable for a product. Secondly, the first playtest wasn't just bad, it was a massive disappointment. From how it was structured to the lack of anything actually interesting in it, even the most ardent supporter of it had to admit it was bad. Finally, the name change confused a lot of people. As a result it lost all momentum, especially when WotC walked back all the OGL stuff and other companies started putting out much better play tests for their TTRPG.
1) I would argue that it was based on hurt and anger rather than hate, but it is hard to sustain a product on that. Still, Tales of the Valiant is good at what it does - provide an upgraded replacement to traditional 5E that stays close enough to the original to maintain true backwards compatibility. Side Note: I was just informed that the video cut out early, I was about to finish off with how I was also excited about D&D 2024, and would likely blend elements of both into my future games. My excitement for this game is not fueled by hurt, anger, or hate of WotC/Hasbro. 2) Yeah, I acknowledged that in the video. I was let down by that too. Subsequent playtests (and the final product) were much better, which is a shame that the first glimpse turned some people off. 3) The name change isn't an issue for me at all, but maybe people care?
@@CopperDragonGames the echo chamber around some creators channels were all about hate, and that's because rage baiting was about half the uproar around it. Hell, even _after_ it entered CC those same people just continued to lie and make up new "leaks" to continue the gravy train of views. This isn't a defense of WotC, they shot themselves in the foot for no good reason, but life isn't a zero sum game, just because WotC did a bad thing it doesn't make everyone else good. As for the first play test, it was so bad that I just never even bothered to want to read a second one because it felt like a cheap, rushed cash in on the drama at WotC. They claimed the game was already in development for months but what the released made zero sense, which added to that feeling. A lot of people who were excited for the game were totally turned off by it.
@@andrewshandle I think the bigger issue is that when Black Flag was first announced, Kobold Press said that it was going to be an all-new game system, but they admitted themselves that they changed course after the OGL scandal to capitalize on it, so the first play test literally was rushed to meet the hype. (This isn't speculation, or hearsay, this is what Kobold Press themselves said happened with Tales of the Valiant)
@Hey-Its-Dingo You are not the first person to say that, but could you point to when/where that was said? So far, nobody has been able to show me the article/video/whatever.
Really the only reason I'm not talking about it is I simply can't afford to spend money on new TTRPG books at the moment. I've been very excited for the game, but I also have to be realistic.
I totally get that. If you want to get a glimpse of the system for free, it might be worth it to grab the Black Flag Reference Document and use open game content from pre-OGLgate to fill in the gaps. Good luck with the financial situation, bud. I hope things improve.
The problem is that it just feels like a homebrewwd 5e with all the issues inherent to 5e not solved....like combat being slow and unintuitive. Like 5e, how many videos are gonna pop up that are titled "how to speed up your ToV combat?"
Probably no videos of that sort, as most of the advice already out there will still apply. That said, I've never found 5E combats to be overly slow or unintuitive, but I tend to favor smaller groups, so my experience is likely different from most.
Unfortunately while wotc went with throwing too many ideas in the playtest and then walking back many of them, KP went the other route and started with basically 5e with some of their new design ideas mixed it. This meant people identified it as a 5e clone and stopped paying attention, despite many interesting things showing up in later development stages
Too many people go with first impressions so KP made a great product but lost on the first impressions while wotc won there by showing lots of things in playtest (egen though they dropped some things that actually went into ToV)
After reading the comments in this video I kind of feel for a Kobold press. Apparently they produced a fairly close clone of 5e. People are complaining there's nothing original here. Have they changed things much you would have heard people saying, this isn't a 5e replacement, it's something different it's its own thing that's not what I want. I'm not sure they could have had a win here. Rialto suffering from several different popular releases of 5E like games such as DC 20 and Shadow dark. A lot of competition in this space at the moment.
I think ToV lost the hype when they released their first playtest that looked like copy paste from the SRD. These points you've brought are interesting, but the majority of the community has forgiven WotC by now (I haven't) and is hyping for 5.5
I hear you. It does seem like most of the community has either moved on altogether or forgiven them. I'm in the camp of folks who love 5E and want to keep playing a version of it. I'm not holding a grudge against WotC, but if I have the opportunity to get the same or similar content from a 3rd party, I'm taking that road every time.
Thanks! I definitely need to get to running that adventure. Night Below is one of my all-time favorites, and Rise of the Drow has been sitting on my shelf unused for FAR too long. I'll get around to it soon, I'm sure! And yes, absolutely - I loved that idea. I never got around to playtesting it... maybe it sounded better than it played in real life, but that was another of the disappointing walk-backs from the playtests.
@@CopperDragonGames It was one of the changes that most excited me. As it stands in 5E, exhaustion is a mechanic that becomes a slippery slope really quick. So much so, that players will do just about anything to absolutely NEVER interact with it. So, I use the 10 levels of exhaustion from the playtest; each level representing a -1 penalty to all d20 rolls until exhaustion is resolved. But I feel that the best systems are those that literally beg the players to interact with them. 1) I allow ANYONE to expend a number of their hit die in combat to heal themselves; but they take a level of exhaustion per every hit die used in this way. 2) I allow martials to take an addition Action in exchange for 2 levels of exhaustion. 3) I allow spell casters to cast an additional spell (even on the same turn as casting another) in exchange for 1 level of exhaustion per spell level. Quite literally ANYTHING the players can come up with that signifies "Hey, I want to take a risk to accomplish something outside the ruleset"... I can quickly adjudicate through this exhaustion system. Which is far better than only a few monster attacks which cause exhaustion levels or "forced travel". Then again, I generally DM very dangerous/high risk/death is a bad decision or roll away type games (which the players LOVE). ANY humanoid monster encountered above level 3 WILL strike a PC they have just downed with an attack on the same turn (ye olde Double Tap), so long as the enemy understands concepts such as "war" and "medicine/healing". This leaves the PC unconscious with two failed death saving throws. I don't do this to be malicious. I do this because most 5e players feel that healing in combat is "inefficient" and would rather leave that downed PC down; which leaves the player sitting out the rest of combat. If you see a party member go down, you SHOULD be running to help them (if you remove metagaming the system itself) and so the change has quite drastically changed the way my players interact in combat. And they absolutely LOVE the way it creates tension, instantly changes the dynamic, and creates more memorable situations. Of course, for those DMs interested: the PC must have been downed by the "active enemy", the enemy must have another attack in their arsenal (within the ruleset; multiattack, etc.), and once they attack they then move on to other targets. NO other enemy on the battlefield will strike the downed PC unless they are brought back to consciousness. My monsters do not understand death saving throw mechanics and trust their comrade has finished off the downed PC. Think it harsh? The PC can still succeed on death saving throws, use the exhaustion mechanic above to heal themselves through hit die (and causing exhaustion), or have another PC heal them through magic or stabilize them through the use of a Medicine Kit. If all else fails, there are still numerous ways through which to bring the PC back to life. So do not be afraid to be brutal when it makes sense. Challenge the players to be flexible in playstyle and not just procedural robots.
I'm hyped for Tales of the Valiant, but I've successfully replaced D&D with Pathfinder with my groups. One of them gather every month or two, so introducing a new system is not going to appeal to them, and the other one 1) barely jumped in PF, and are players alongside me in a D&D campaign I do not DM. As much I'd like to use ToV as replacement to 5E, I won't have the opportunity to play it for a good while.
I looked at the monk, and was not impressed at all. Not even a tiny bit. I also find the cleric changes uninspiring. They had a chance to really make a unique game, but tweaked 5e. I think it isn't different enough to matter to most people. I think NOT tying it to Midgard and making cool classes/subclasses with real flavor will turn out to be a huge marketing mistake. It's just not different enough from dnd..... That said, the monsters are good.....so that's good.
Fair enough. We may not be incredibly vocal on the Internet, but there are lots of folks who wanted a tweaked version of 5E. I understand your take on the marketing miss with tying it to Midgard, but I don't know that I would have gone that route either. Maybe too risky. All the eggs in one basket, so to speak.
Well they made the core rules setting agnostic but it is still tied to Midgard. The official setting they'll be releasing for ToV is the Labyrinth and Midgard had a central place in it
It's not being discussed because at this point, it's clear that it was a cash grab to capitalize on the OGL crisis, under the assumption that it would lead to a schism like the one between 3.5e and 4e that allowed Paizo to fill a void with Pathfinder 1e. Having gone over the released Tales PHB, it's clear that it would be generous calling it a sidegrade to D&D 5e--most of it is copy/pasted ideas, and what new is there is dubiously designed from a balance perspective at best, with a handful of legitimately good ideas across hundreds of pages--but ultimately the end product feels very low effort. Unfortunately for Kobold Press, there won't be a schism like before, because anger over the OGL crisis has been largely reduced to cinders at this point, and much more importantly, WOTC has not 'abandoned' their version of D&D this time--instead, they're releasing their own 'enhanced' or revised edition in a few months, so there's no need for people who just want to play 5e D&D to flock elsewhere. Couple all that with TotV having far less existing content and far less support (not having a digital character builder by itself is a huge downside), and it all culminates in there being little to no reason for Tales to exist outside of appealing to the slim minority who, after over a year, have decided that they're still completely done with WOTC after the OGL debacle.
So i am a tales of the valiant supporter and player and i adore the system. Even monk seems to play better in the system than it did in 5e. Its really good for people that want a boosted 5e , but not a fully new ttrpg alltogether
Kobald Press poisoned the well by putting their worst foot forward. The first two packets were nearly identical to 5E and didn’t address any of the game’s well known problems. I, and many other perspective players, completely gave up on the system after seeing the lack of ambition.
@@jinxtheunluckypony The wizard and fighter were in there, yes. However, Packet #2 also introduced the luck system, the talent system, and the way spell lists would be organized - all of these are reasons I'm really digging this system over other 5E variants at the moment.
This was exactly what happened for me. It was a complete lack of ambition and creativity. It gave me zero confidence in their ability to really make something compelling. However, there is a reason those packets were basically cut and paste. KP was going in a completely different direction ( I don't care what these others say and even the BS statement Kp put out later). Earlier the prior year they were working on something to get away from the OGL and then the OGL debacle made them pull the trigger but before they put any design docs out, WOTC changed course and KP decided it would be more profitable to be the new pathfinder for 5E than their original plans. So they threw together a cut and paste of 5E with a 'new goal' to be true to 5E. I remember their original statements before they changed course. Don't believe anyone that tells you this current version has always been their goal. It wasn't.
Can you point me to the original statements you mentioned? You're not the first to say something like this, but I don't recall seeing anything like it (and I was keeping up with KP prior to the OGL scandal).
ToV is for people who don't hate 5e. It doesnt change things that dont need to be changed, its a more messured swing, fixing mostly level 10+ in classes and monsters If you are coming at it wanting to not play 5e anymore, you're going to hate it. But for me, i love it. I'm able to use a lot of the 5e subclasses i already have wothout massive power scale issues like 5e2024 is going to have, the dc20 is a "new" thing entirely, daggerheart looks fun but It feels like it would be better for like a casual one shot kind of style game, etc.
Very well said. I hope I get to play DC20 and Daggerheart too, but I love 5E, and it's the style of system I intend to keep running until I see something that knocks me off my feet.
It sounded just too much like D&D 5e with a different name. And since I already own DnD there really was no reason to switch to another DnD 5e that is called [no DnD5e].
It's certainly more generic. Black Flag sounds like a pirate game, though. It seems a little off the mark for what the product is trying to accomplish.
Yeah, I messed up there, but it should end with, "and I'm excited about D&D 2024 too. I'll probably incorporate elements of both in my future 5E games, but ToV is likely to be my base system. What do you think?"
They added YELLOW dragons! Crazy I know. Something WotC spit on and ignore, Richard Alan Lloyd with the concept he gave back in ol Dragon Magazine 65 was a gift! I didnt like the wingless yellow and orange dragons Lloyd made in Dr.M 265 but still. If Tales of the Valiant releases more chromatic dragons like orange, purple, gray, brown, beige (2e yellow sand dragon was more that color ) THEN I will buy 2 x copies more of the Monster book! Wouldnt mind their take on Gem dragons and have more extras of them and same for more Metallics. Why is it so hard WotC. Dragon bloat my a$$. Just make them distinct, unique and ALL have wings. Some can have adopted wings, like the brown dragons " swim " through the sand 😁
Most paladins I've played alongside cast very few spells. Those spell slots are made for smiting. 🤣 Seriously, though, classes already get unique spells through their subclasses.
Not nearly enough marketing after the campaign ended and they just didn't deliver enough original ideas. Imo, Kobold Press weak spot has always been their design of character options. Neat ideas, poor execution. TotV has a few things that I will probably steal for my unholy amalgamation of 5e, OneDnD and 3rd party content, but it felt really underwhelming as a whole, with the exception of the Lineage/Heritage system.
I actually loved Tome of Heroes, and I'm loving TotV, so I respectfully disagree with you on some key points here. However, I will also be running an unholy amalgamation of 5e, OneDnD, 3rd party content, so I had to give your comment a heart just for solidarity with that game plan. 😁
The bard being able to grab two spells from anyone's list is exactly why the standardized spell lists got walked back. I believe it also kinda diluted the sorcerer's identity too.
The key difference between wizard and sorcerer, in my opinion, has always been the class abilities rather than the spells. I get why some would come to that conclusion, though. But the bard thing? Geez, I hope they didn't back away from an elegant system-wide concept for the sake of a class ability that most campaigns will never survive long enough to see. 🙄
They absolutely are. You can run Tales of the Valiant monsters in a D&D game alongside stuff from their older books (like Creature Codex) and MCDM's Flee, Mortals! with ease. Even if the core system isn't your speed, the monster book is worth checking out.
I'm sure I will! I followed some of the early playtest content, but I haven't kept up as much recently. I have full faith in Dungeon Coach's design chops, and he seems like a genuinely great guy.
@@CopperDragonGames Right now the .7 alpha is available for free, and actively taking feedback on playtest. Once the kick starter closes, they move to the beta, and will continue refining it.
@@CopperDragonGames No one to play with offline and don't know where to recruit for online is the problem. I tried weeks ago on the KP discord but they deleted it.
I always feel just like comic books TTRPGS have a marketing problem. Like yeah you could say well it’s hard to compete with D&D, but let’s not forget it is the original but it had the panic in the 70s the boost it up, like oooh your parents think this game is bad for your soul ect ect. And really despite being the grandfather of TTRPGs……even grandpa didn’t get popular till 5th edition thanks to the internet. I think ya gotta do more than just having popular community members talk about the game (which does help) but we need to have ads of the game on IGN, TH-cam ect. Advertise how it’s better than D&D, maybe show hey ya just need to buy this and that’s it compared to D&D ya buy 8 books as a new player. Show maybe how you can do a solo dungeon if ya wanna try. Have a free version with less content but since people can try the look at it more. I’m very new to TTRPGS and I played Carin cause I heard how easy it was to make a character, and it was free. It’s difficult but in the age of the internet and increase in nerd culture it should be easier to get peoples attention from D&D.
Because its just 5e with a couple tweeks that don't actually fix the issues. KP really dropped the ball from their first announcement. They went from a full custom system based around 5e and then after wizards backtracked on the OGL KP decided to just make their product a companion product to 5e. I lost interest in TOV a long long time ago.
Somewhere I missed the message on the "full custom system" bit. I had my fingers crossed from the beginning hoping the system would be fully backwards compatible with 5E.
ToV was a disappointment to me. not bc it was a "5e clone" (i'd like a non-wotc 5e). but i was expecting a simpler set of rules like 5e was supposed to be in 2014 and ToV'd bring more complications than i was expecting.
ToV just didn't fix enough of the issues of 5e to get away with being a clone. As is the game is just a 5e with less options, and some of the aesthetic is very meh. Right now their merit is just not being WotC and that isn't enough
@CopperDragonGames As I kind of review information of ToV I think part of the issue was actually just that the initial playtests were really poorly put together, as one of my core complaints about 5e does look like it was addressed. That is fixing the fact that feats are clearly a core component of distinguishing your character but they run contrary to making your character more powerful through ASIs. It looks like they did make talents available with an attached +1. My other issue with 5e I hadn't seen them address was the issue of magic item pricing, but perhaps they got to that too.
Totally understandable. If you're not into 5E, it makes total sense to not be excited about an upgrade to that system. I hope you enjoy whatever game(s) you've switched to!
I think nobody is talking about it because: A) it's basically tweaked 5e, and **WotC is releasing its own** tweaked 5e, so you have two VERY SIMILAR products, and why go for the copy when you can go to the source? B) the competition seems to not only be based on 5e, but improve upon it or add its own twist. You probably already own 5e, so why buy "basically 5e" when Pathfinder 2e, DC20, MCDM, Daggerheart have **more original ideas?**
@CopperDragonGames unfortunately, the trouble with all these 5e products is that it's still D&D almost like published homebrew rules. I like 5e played and ran it ever since it came out. Why would I switch. The big thing to look for is who is writing 3rd party content for it. I have now switched to Shadowdark
Also, I think part of the problem with the adoption of ToV rates too is also because of a few issues (at least that I have observed):
1) Firstly, and I feel this is the biggie, most people are probably waiting for physical books to arrive. This is mostly for people playing in person, but also gives the table a chance to share books and not get pegged for sharing the PDFs all over (there's sometimes that one bad apple in the group that starts sending around copies against the wishes of the original PDF purchaser, and soon you got people sharing it around to many other people than originally intended). This also prevents people from being tied to their electronics at the table.
2) Lack of digital tools at the moment. You have to admit, DnD Beyond was a game changer for robust character creation in the early days and the ability to add books and "share" them within campaigns. Sure you can buy the ToV books on Shard or get the ToV SRD to create characters or use the premades on the ToV site, but people are probably waiting for more robust tools.
3) Waiting for the official release of the VTT, I know it hasn't come out for Foundry (not sure for Roll20 or any others outside of the rules on Shard), and that is definitely putting a tamper on me and others introducing it to players and such.
4) There is still about 3 to 4 months to wait for the GM's Guide, which, maybe some people might be waiting for to have all 3 core books to get going, some people are weird like that.
5) When they launched the campaign, we (who were impacted or knew people who were) were fresh off the heels of the OGL kerfuffle. So our wallets were open for a way to show WotC that our money could be moved to other games that were not Hasbro owned. It was a way for us to have our cake and eat it too, to play 5e in a slightly newer way and not have Hasbro ruffling through our pockets for loose change.
6) Summer is here, most people are gearing up for conventions, doing vacations, being outside a lot more, not having school, and such. This is probably pretty minor, but still a factor, I feel.
7) Lastly, we have had a few other RPGs pop up since the start of the ToV Kickstarter. DC20 & MCDM both of which are in alpha/pre-alpha states. Daggerheart had their beta pop up in March and it looks pretty solid and seems to be working with the community to make a great game and there are a lot of Critical Role fans (Critters) that will follow the team to whatever system they are playing. Pathfinder 2e had a remaster that happened at the end of 2023. Stormlight Archive RPG might be looking to get a piece of the action with its fundraising happening in August. And D&D 5e 2024 edition has been going hard with their marketing and hype since the end of May. That's not to discount other great recent RPGs out there like Level Up's Advanced 5e, Knave 2e, Shadowdark, Cairn 2e, Kobolds Ate My Baby (Orange Book), Dragonbane, Eat the Reich, Shadow of the Weird Wizard, Shadow of the Demon Lord, Land of Eem, Vaesen, Call of Cthulhu, OSR and OSE titles, Savage World, Index Card RPG, EZd6, Crown and Bone, those that are holding on to their older 1e, 2e, and 3e D&D books and running games in those systems, and a slew of others.
Once the physical books and the VTT support and more digital tools start to come out from Kobold Press, I think you are going to start seeing more momentum. Although, that might also be bad timing on Kobold Press' part (though no fault of their own), the last core book Tov's GM's Guide is due in September (soft and could be pushed), which is also the date of the initial new 5e books (PHB Sept 17th) are coming out. 5e 2024 isn't a total new rules set, it can slot right in with the 2014 5e rules and people can just adopt the new player characters and wait for the new monsters coming in early 2025 (Feb 18th), or just stick with slotting in Tome of Beasts, Flee Mortals, or Advanced 5e monsters to provide a better challenge to the more beefy characters. ToV can slip in and possible slough off some D&D gamers looking for a non-WotC 5e variant without having to further support WotC/Hasbro, but need to have books in hand, hit their GM Guide release in September, and have their digital tools running smooth as I'm sure WotC is going to fumble a bit at launch.
I do agree with you that there are some great ToV rules and could not fault you in your top 5 list of great changes over current 5e, but will it be enough that will get people to move over and/or compare it to the 2024 5e changes that are being shown now and survived playtest? Who knows? D&D is the 800-pound RPG in the room, and there is no ignoring it when TTRPGs are brought up.
First of all, I want to thank you for your detailed reply! You make a lot of great points, and I agree that a lot of the quiet reception is due to timing and competition. The VTT release schedule is definitely slowing me down. I'm typically a Foundry guy, and I picked the Foundry pledge of the ToV Kickstarter, but that piece hasn't been released yet. The ToV system is there, but the books aren't live yet, so you can only access the basics.
I have a feeling that D&D is moving toward being the Kleenex of 5E. They might have the biggest market share, and we might even SAY we're playing D&D when we talk about game night, but a lot of us are going to be playing another version - just like people ask for Kleenex, but pick up another brand when they actually get to the store. Only time will tell, but I distinctly remember playing "D&D" back in 2013 or so, but it was totally Pathfinder with a bunch of prestige classes from 3.5.
In the end, I'll probably end up running some kind of 5E abomination that steals from multiple variations of 5E (the same way I played Pathfinder + 3.5 + random 3rd party d20 products back when 4E was the dominant D&D game), and I know I'll be keeping a lot of rules from Tales of the Valiant in the 5E version of that mashup.
@@CopperDragonGames I agree with your assessment of just saying D&D rather than TTRPG, D&D has become as ubiquitous with the likes of Kleenex, Xerox, and Band-Aid, and probably not moving there, but is actually there. No matter what game you play, it just gives an easy way to give the "normies" something to hold on to: funny dice, character sheets, imagination, and a person directing the adversaries and challenges to be faced. More than likely, someone has seen it in mainstream media, be it in a comicbook (Rick and Morty), a cartoon (Gravity Falls, Dungeons and Dragons [1983], Futurama), a TV show (Stranger Things, Big Bang Theory), a movie (Honor Among Thieves, E.T., Onward), video games (Baldur's Gate 3), or knows/knew someone who played/plays (some form of) it.
I also agree we all play our own way, we have homebrewed 5e so much within my group that we play with some stuff from BG3, crafting and gathering rules from Hamund's Harvesting Handbook, use the clocks system and a little of the flashback rules from Blades in the Dark, and nix some overpowered (gamebreaking) combos, making it wholly our game at our table. I do like the Doom and Luck point system in ToV and might use those games that I run after we get done with the campaign we are in the middle of (and can get buy in from the players). I already use the tougher monsters (better monsters for their CR?) from the various TOB books, Flee Mortals, and Advanced 5e, with a nod toward Forge of Foes by Mike Shea to tweak and homebrew stuff I cannot find. What works at my table may not work for your table and vice versa, and that's okay. I think every table plays it slightly different and as long as they are being good stewards of TTRPGs, then game on!
Fun to see Dragonbane mentioned for once, feel like that one similarly really flew under the radar of a lot of people but Free League has put out banger after banger and that one is no exception. And just to strengthen the first point in your reply to CDG, even when i do see posts about it being played by acquantances online it's often still being refered to as "DnD"(tho that may be partly due to me being a swede and the swedish name being DoD lol)
@@LordZeebee Funny you mention it, just got my physical copy of Dragonbane in today (taking advantage of the sale on Free League's site as I write this). I also got Vaesen, which was my main reason for hopping on the sale, after the disappointment I felt with Candela Obscura's rules. I heard many good things about Dragonbane and it's on top of my "to-read-next" pile when I am done with my current reading.
When I was mentioning other games, I glossed over many other titles (Numenera and Worlds Without Number come to mind and I could pile one a pile of one page RPGs, lots of obscure indie titles, and I'm sure other great games on my shelves (and thumb drive) that are just waiting for the right group), there are many titles to play and that work well to fill that not "WotC's D&D" void that many people have been creating since the OGL disaster.
I can concur, I am one who has the PDF but waiting for the physical book to arrive before really diving into it. I guess technically i don’t have the PDF yet. Have my link to download it and just haven’t bc i want the physical book.
I think a lot of us jumped onboard with anything that wasn't Wizards D&D because we were so angry with Wizards. I anger-bought a pile of PF2 books and jumped onto ToV with both feet, just because it wasn't Wizards.
I am still done with Wizards, and I'm thrilled that I got into PF2, but I haven't looked into ToV yet. I have had the PDFs for two months and just haven't spent any real time with them. I need to. Thanks for this.
You are most welcome. I also tried to get into PF2E, but as much as I love the character building, I didn't fall in love with the actual gameplay. (To be fair, I think it had more to do with the two GMs I played with rather than the mechanics). For running games, I want to stick closer to what I've gotten most comfortable with over the years, which is 5E. Not judging anyone for moving onto other systems, but I love 5E, and this is a GREAT sidestep.
@CopperDragonGames Mind you, I have only played 5e twice, and used to play 1st / 2nd back in the 80s, and then switched to GURPS. That being said, I always have thought D&D's combat was boring... like 5e especially. Adding in the flair of being able to target and lop off limbs that GURPS has, is amazing. We did play PF2e for quite some time, and the tactics just never took hold enough, it was more exciting than the times I played 5e, but definitely not as cool as GURPS. Pf1e, was decent, though a lot if that was due to having a great GM.
Got my copy of ToV yesterday. Super happy about it, reading through it now, ready to start a game soon (I've been playing the Alpha release for a while, but I'm eager to start playing the "real" version).
I skimmed it s little, will readily admit I didn't do more, and I did look in detail at Sorcerer. My impression: they copy/pasted 5e and then made a few changes. Not enough to get me excited. I should go back and do a more detailed read to see if they've fixed some of the problems, though, as there still a call to play 5e at my table, and having some well-done fixes to serious problems that I don't have time to fix myself - like CR - sure would be nice. I'm just not excited by what I've seen. I will also admit, I haven't seen a lot. I think they were trying to do what Pathfinder 1 did for 3.5. Since lightning DOESN'T only strike once, maybe they'll succeed, but Paizo wrote their own, and this seems copied with some rewording. Probably just an impression, though. Kobold does good stuff. I think part of its success or failure will be dependent on whether the other major "replacements" for 5e scratch the right itch for people, and that will vary by individual. 5e was a gateway for a lot of people, and people have different reasons for wanting to move on from 5e. Those who like 5e fine but want the bugs fixed, or who love 5e but hate the company, will find a lot to love. If you genuinely want something different, this is ntmot for you. Daggerheart is far more narrative driven, DC20 and MCDM go in opposite directions with aspects of being an action rpg versus being a tactical rpg, and they all make significant changes to the classic D&D formula. The closest to the formula other than Black Flag/Tales of the Valiant, would be Pathfinder 2, but the dizzying array of character options and huge numbers can be intomidating - the math is tight, though. The proce tag, though.... five $60 hardcovers isn't spare change! But i think Tlaes of the Valiant earns a place in the market - a market I'm glad to see diversifying.
I am glad to see the market diversifying as well, and I agree on many of your points. Your take on the sorcerer is pretty accurate. ToV is decidedly not a full-on overhaul of 5E. It's a nuanced upgrade to a very familiar framework. I love that it changes some things I didn't like, but it kept the things I loved intact.
There is an actual play that uses Tales of the Valiant as its system: Roll for InitiaGive here on youtube, on Forrest Valkai’s channel. That’s at least something, I guess.
I wasn't aware. Thank you for pointing that out!
I'm with you so I clicked because you are talking about it...I love Kobold Press' work, especially the monsters. I'm also a fan of ToV.
Thanks, Keith! I appreciate you stopping by!
I will say that I'm happy with ToV overall; I feel like I did when Pathfinder first came out, and streamlined 3.5. My group is committed to not giving Wizards any more money, so I think we're switching to ToV for our next campaign
Totally on board with this sentiment. I'm not fully boycotting WotC anymore, but if I can find a similar or better product from Kobold Press (or any other 3rd party publisher), I lean toward supporting the underdog.
There are three big problems for TotV.
First off, most of the excitement was based on hate for WotC which isn't sustainable for a product.
Secondly, the first playtest wasn't just bad, it was a massive disappointment. From how it was structured to the lack of anything actually interesting in it, even the most ardent supporter of it had to admit it was bad.
Finally, the name change confused a lot of people.
As a result it lost all momentum, especially when WotC walked back all the OGL stuff and other companies started putting out much better play tests for their TTRPG.
1) I would argue that it was based on hurt and anger rather than hate, but it is hard to sustain a product on that. Still, Tales of the Valiant is good at what it does - provide an upgraded replacement to traditional 5E that stays close enough to the original to maintain true backwards compatibility. Side Note: I was just informed that the video cut out early, I was about to finish off with how I was also excited about D&D 2024, and would likely blend elements of both into my future games. My excitement for this game is not fueled by hurt, anger, or hate of WotC/Hasbro.
2) Yeah, I acknowledged that in the video. I was let down by that too. Subsequent playtests (and the final product) were much better, which is a shame that the first glimpse turned some people off.
3) The name change isn't an issue for me at all, but maybe people care?
@@CopperDragonGames the echo chamber around some creators channels were all about hate, and that's because rage baiting was about half the uproar around it. Hell, even _after_ it entered CC those same people just continued to lie and make up new "leaks" to continue the gravy train of views. This isn't a defense of WotC, they shot themselves in the foot for no good reason, but life isn't a zero sum game, just because WotC did a bad thing it doesn't make everyone else good.
As for the first play test, it was so bad that I just never even bothered to want to read a second one because it felt like a cheap, rushed cash in on the drama at WotC. They claimed the game was already in development for months but what the released made zero sense, which added to that feeling. A lot of people who were excited for the game were totally turned off by it.
Black Flag was such a better name than 'Tales of the Valiant'. It really is a dumb name.
@@andrewshandle I think the bigger issue is that when Black Flag was first announced, Kobold Press said that it was going to be an all-new game system, but they admitted themselves that they changed course after the OGL scandal to capitalize on it, so the first play test literally was rushed to meet the hype.
(This isn't speculation, or hearsay, this is what Kobold Press themselves said happened with Tales of the Valiant)
@Hey-Its-Dingo You are not the first person to say that, but could you point to when/where that was said? So far, nobody has been able to show me the article/video/whatever.
Really the only reason I'm not talking about it is I simply can't afford to spend money on new TTRPG books at the moment. I've been very excited for the game, but I also have to be realistic.
I totally get that. If you want to get a glimpse of the system for free, it might be worth it to grab the Black Flag Reference Document and use open game content from pre-OGLgate to fill in the gaps. Good luck with the financial situation, bud. I hope things improve.
The problem is that it just feels like a homebrewwd 5e with all the issues inherent to 5e not solved....like combat being slow and unintuitive.
Like 5e, how many videos are gonna pop up that are titled "how to speed up your ToV combat?"
Probably no videos of that sort, as most of the advice already out there will still apply. That said, I've never found 5E combats to be overly slow or unintuitive, but I tend to favor smaller groups, so my experience is likely different from most.
Unfortunately while wotc went with throwing too many ideas in the playtest and then walking back many of them, KP went the other route and started with basically 5e with some of their new design ideas mixed it.
This meant people identified it as a 5e clone and stopped paying attention, despite many interesting things showing up in later development stages
Too many people go with first impressions so KP made a great product but lost on the first impressions while wotc won there by showing lots of things in playtest (egen though they dropped some things that actually went into ToV)
After reading the comments in this video I kind of feel for a Kobold press. Apparently they produced a fairly close clone of 5e. People are complaining there's nothing original here. Have they changed things much you would have heard people saying, this isn't a 5e replacement, it's something different it's its own thing that's not what I want. I'm not sure they could have had a win here. Rialto suffering from several different popular releases of 5E like games such as DC 20 and Shadow dark. A lot of competition in this space at the moment.
So true, and I don't know that they'll come out on top in the end, but they've put in a lot of solid work. Haters gonna hate.
I think ToV lost the hype when they released their first playtest that looked like copy paste from the SRD. These points you've brought are interesting, but the majority of the community has forgiven WotC by now (I haven't) and is hyping for 5.5
I hear you. It does seem like most of the community has either moved on altogether or forgiven them. I'm in the camp of folks who love 5E and want to keep playing a version of it. I'm not holding a grudge against WotC, but if I have the opportunity to get the same or similar content from a 3rd party, I'm taking that road every time.
You have some great books on your shelf! I did the first section of Rise of Drow.
Oh, and we should have stayed with the 10 point exhaustion change.
Thanks! I definitely need to get to running that adventure. Night Below is one of my all-time favorites, and Rise of the Drow has been sitting on my shelf unused for FAR too long. I'll get around to it soon, I'm sure!
And yes, absolutely - I loved that idea. I never got around to playtesting it... maybe it sounded better than it played in real life, but that was another of the disappointing walk-backs from the playtests.
@@CopperDragonGames It was one of the changes that most excited me. As it stands in 5E, exhaustion is a mechanic that becomes a slippery slope really quick. So much so, that players will do just about anything to absolutely NEVER interact with it.
So, I use the 10 levels of exhaustion from the playtest; each level representing a -1 penalty to all d20 rolls until exhaustion is resolved. But I feel that the best systems are those that literally beg the players to interact with them.
1) I allow ANYONE to expend a number of their hit die in combat to heal themselves; but they take a level of exhaustion per every hit die used in this way.
2) I allow martials to take an addition Action in exchange for 2 levels of exhaustion.
3) I allow spell casters to cast an additional spell (even on the same turn as casting another) in exchange for 1 level of exhaustion per spell level.
Quite literally ANYTHING the players can come up with that signifies "Hey, I want to take a risk to accomplish something outside the ruleset"... I can quickly adjudicate through this exhaustion system. Which is far better than only a few monster attacks which cause exhaustion levels or "forced travel".
Then again, I generally DM very dangerous/high risk/death is a bad decision or roll away type games (which the players LOVE). ANY humanoid monster encountered above level 3 WILL strike a PC they have just downed with an attack on the same turn (ye olde Double Tap), so long as the enemy understands concepts such as "war" and "medicine/healing". This leaves the PC unconscious with two failed death saving throws.
I don't do this to be malicious. I do this because most 5e players feel that healing in combat is "inefficient" and would rather leave that downed PC down; which leaves the player sitting out the rest of combat. If you see a party member go down, you SHOULD be running to help them (if you remove metagaming the system itself) and so the change has quite drastically changed the way my players interact in combat. And they absolutely LOVE the way it creates tension, instantly changes the dynamic, and creates more memorable situations.
Of course, for those DMs interested: the PC must have been downed by the "active enemy", the enemy must have another attack in their arsenal (within the ruleset; multiattack, etc.), and once they attack they then move on to other targets. NO other enemy on the battlefield will strike the downed PC unless they are brought back to consciousness. My monsters do not understand death saving throw mechanics and trust their comrade has finished off the downed PC.
Think it harsh? The PC can still succeed on death saving throws, use the exhaustion mechanic above to heal themselves through hit die (and causing exhaustion), or have another PC heal them through magic or stabilize them through the use of a Medicine Kit. If all else fails, there are still numerous ways through which to bring the PC back to life. So do not be afraid to be brutal when it makes sense. Challenge the players to be flexible in playstyle and not just procedural robots.
I'm hyped for Tales of the Valiant, but I've successfully replaced D&D with Pathfinder with my groups. One of them gather every month or two, so introducing a new system is not going to appeal to them, and the other one 1) barely jumped in PF, and are players alongside me in a D&D campaign I do not DM.
As much I'd like to use ToV as replacement to 5E, I won't have the opportunity to play it for a good while.
Understandable. Glad you're enjoying Pathfinder! I've got a lot of respect for Paizo's products too.
I looked at the monk, and was not impressed at all. Not even a tiny bit. I also find the cleric changes uninspiring. They had a chance to really make a unique game, but tweaked 5e. I think it isn't different enough to matter to most people. I think NOT tying it to Midgard and making cool classes/subclasses with real flavor will turn out to be a huge marketing mistake. It's just not different enough from dnd..... That said, the monsters are good.....so that's good.
Fair enough. We may not be incredibly vocal on the Internet, but there are lots of folks who wanted a tweaked version of 5E. I understand your take on the marketing miss with tying it to Midgard, but I don't know that I would have gone that route either. Maybe too risky. All the eggs in one basket, so to speak.
Well they made the core rules setting agnostic but it is still tied to Midgard. The official setting they'll be releasing for ToV is the Labyrinth and Midgard had a central place in it
ToV Warlock is AWESOME!!!!!!! I love ToV
There are far too many things to have covered in a short video like this. I'm planning some more nuanced breakdowns soon. Thank you for watching!
Oh, and yes absolutely the ToV Warlock is awesome! Love it!
It's not being discussed because at this point, it's clear that it was a cash grab to capitalize on the OGL crisis, under the assumption that it would lead to a schism like the one between 3.5e and 4e that allowed Paizo to fill a void with Pathfinder 1e. Having gone over the released Tales PHB, it's clear that it would be generous calling it a sidegrade to D&D 5e--most of it is copy/pasted ideas, and what new is there is dubiously designed from a balance perspective at best, with a handful of legitimately good ideas across hundreds of pages--but ultimately the end product feels very low effort. Unfortunately for Kobold Press, there won't be a schism like before, because anger over the OGL crisis has been largely reduced to cinders at this point, and much more importantly, WOTC has not 'abandoned' their version of D&D this time--instead, they're releasing their own 'enhanced' or revised edition in a few months, so there's no need for people who just want to play 5e D&D to flock elsewhere. Couple all that with TotV having far less existing content and far less support (not having a digital character builder by itself is a huge downside), and it all culminates in there being little to no reason for Tales to exist outside of appealing to the slim minority who, after over a year, have decided that they're still completely done with WOTC after the OGL debacle.
So i am a tales of the valiant supporter and player and i adore the system. Even monk seems to play better in the system than it did in 5e. Its really good for people that want a boosted 5e , but not a fully new ttrpg alltogether
Agreed! I'm on the same game plan!
Kobald Press poisoned the well by putting their worst foot forward. The first two packets were nearly identical to 5E and didn’t address any of the game’s well known problems. I, and many other perspective players, completely gave up on the system after seeing the lack of ambition.
Okay, so Packet #1 didn't address much. I even acknowledged that in the video. Did you read #2, though? 🤔
@@CopperDragonGames 1 was the ancestries and 2 was the Fighter and Wizard, right? Reading their take on the Fighter was what made me lose interest.
@@jinxtheunluckypony The wizard and fighter were in there, yes. However, Packet #2 also introduced the luck system, the talent system, and the way spell lists would be organized - all of these are reasons I'm really digging this system over other 5E variants at the moment.
This was exactly what happened for me. It was a complete lack of ambition and creativity. It gave me zero confidence in their ability to really make something compelling. However, there is a reason those packets were basically cut and paste. KP was going in a completely different direction ( I don't care what these others say and even the BS statement Kp put out later). Earlier the prior year they were working on something to get away from the OGL and then the OGL debacle made them pull the trigger but before they put any design docs out, WOTC changed course and KP decided it would be more profitable to be the new pathfinder for 5E than their original plans. So they threw together a cut and paste of 5E with a 'new goal' to be true to 5E. I remember their original statements before they changed course. Don't believe anyone that tells you this current version has always been their goal. It wasn't.
Can you point me to the original statements you mentioned? You're not the first to say something like this, but I don't recall seeing anything like it (and I was keeping up with KP prior to the OGL scandal).
ToV is for people who don't hate 5e. It doesnt change things that dont need to be changed, its a more messured swing, fixing mostly level 10+ in classes and monsters
If you are coming at it wanting to not play 5e anymore, you're going to hate it. But for me, i love it. I'm able to use a lot of the 5e subclasses i already have wothout massive power scale issues like 5e2024 is going to have, the dc20 is a "new" thing entirely, daggerheart looks fun but It feels like it would be better for like a casual one shot kind of style game, etc.
Very well said. I hope I get to play DC20 and Daggerheart too, but I love 5E, and it's the style of system I intend to keep running until I see something that knocks me off my feet.
It sounded just too much like D&D 5e with a different name. And since I already own DnD there really was no reason to switch to another DnD 5e that is called [no DnD5e].
I mean, you're not far off. It is very similar - just with improvements.
I'm talking about it, constantly ;)
I noticed, for sure! Loved your recent video on ToV dragons!
@@CopperDragonGames Thanks!
Project Black Flag was an awesome name. Tales of the Valiant isn't.
It's certainly more generic. Black Flag sounds like a pirate game, though. It seems a little off the mark for what the product is trying to accomplish.
I think your video cuts off at the end. "The 2024 previews are starting to hit-"
Yeah, I messed up there, but it should end with, "and I'm excited about D&D 2024 too. I'll probably incorporate elements of both in my future 5E games, but ToV is likely to be my base system. What do you think?"
They added YELLOW dragons! Crazy I know. Something WotC spit on and ignore, Richard Alan Lloyd with the concept he gave back in ol Dragon Magazine 65 was a gift! I didnt like the wingless yellow and orange dragons Lloyd made in Dr.M 265 but still. If Tales of the Valiant releases more chromatic dragons like orange, purple, gray, brown, beige (2e yellow sand dragon was more that color ) THEN I will buy 2 x copies more of the Monster book! Wouldnt mind their take on Gem dragons and have more extras of them and same for more Metallics. Why is it so hard WotC. Dragon bloat my a$$. Just make them distinct, unique and ALL have wings. Some can have adopted wings, like the brown dragons " swim " through the sand 😁
I like my casters to each have a few unique spells, otherwise why am i playing a Paladin instead of a Fighter/Cleric?
I mean not I don't see your line of logic but...presumably class features which are unique
Most paladins I've played alongside cast very few spells. Those spell slots are made for smiting. 🤣 Seriously, though, classes already get unique spells through their subclasses.
Im still excited
Wooohooo!!! Welcome to the team!
Not nearly enough marketing after the campaign ended and they just didn't deliver enough original ideas. Imo, Kobold Press weak spot has always been their design of character options. Neat ideas, poor execution. TotV has a few things that I will probably steal for my unholy amalgamation of 5e, OneDnD and 3rd party content, but it felt really underwhelming as a whole, with the exception of the Lineage/Heritage system.
I actually loved Tome of Heroes, and I'm loving TotV, so I respectfully disagree with you on some key points here. However, I will also be running an unholy amalgamation of 5e, OneDnD, 3rd party content, so I had to give your comment a heart just for solidarity with that game plan. 😁
The bard being able to grab two spells from anyone's list is exactly why the standardized spell lists got walked back. I believe it also kinda diluted the sorcerer's identity too.
The key difference between wizard and sorcerer, in my opinion, has always been the class abilities rather than the spells. I get why some would come to that conclusion, though. But the bard thing? Geez, I hope they didn't back away from an elegant system-wide concept for the sake of a class ability that most campaigns will never survive long enough to see. 🙄
Are the monsters not portable to 5e though?
They absolutely are. You can run Tales of the Valiant monsters in a D&D game alongside stuff from their older books (like Creature Codex) and MCDM's Flee, Mortals! with ease. Even if the core system isn't your speed, the monster book is worth checking out.
I think you would like what DC20 is doing :)
I'm sure I will! I followed some of the early playtest content, but I haven't kept up as much recently. I have full faith in Dungeon Coach's design chops, and he seems like a genuinely great guy.
@@CopperDragonGames Right now the .7 alpha is available for free, and actively taking feedback on playtest. Once the kick starter closes, they move to the beta, and will continue refining it.
It's so hard to find a game
Understandable. It's a niche within a niche. Anytime I can't find a game, I just start one myself. Maybe time to GM a game?
@@CopperDragonGames No one to play with offline and don't know where to recruit for online is the problem. I tried weeks ago on the KP discord but they deleted it.
I always feel just like comic books TTRPGS have a marketing problem. Like yeah you could say well it’s hard to compete with D&D, but let’s not forget it is the original but it had the panic in the 70s the boost it up, like oooh your parents think this game is bad for your soul ect ect. And really despite being the grandfather of TTRPGs……even grandpa didn’t get popular till 5th edition thanks to the internet. I think ya gotta do more than just having popular community members talk about the game (which does help) but we need to have ads of the game on IGN, TH-cam ect. Advertise how it’s better than D&D, maybe show hey ya just need to buy this and that’s it compared to D&D ya buy 8 books as a new player. Show maybe how you can do a solo dungeon if ya wanna try. Have a free version with less content but since people can try the look at it more. I’m very new to TTRPGS and I played Carin cause I heard how easy it was to make a character, and it was free. It’s difficult but in the age of the internet and increase in nerd culture it should be easier to get peoples attention from D&D.
I just got my books today!
Wooooohooooo!!!! Enjoy!
Tales of the Valiant? Nah. Let's play Shadowdark RPG.
Nothing wrong with that! I hear Shadowdark is a blast too. Hope you have a great time with it, and thank you for stopping by!
@@CopperDragonGamesShadowdark is just AD&D OSR clone with home brew rules added in..
Because its just 5e with a couple tweeks that don't actually fix the issues. KP really dropped the ball from their first announcement. They went from a full custom system based around 5e and then after wizards backtracked on the OGL KP decided to just make their product a companion product to 5e. I lost interest in TOV a long long time ago.
Somewhere I missed the message on the "full custom system" bit. I had my fingers crossed from the beginning hoping the system would be fully backwards compatible with 5E.
Sounds like it has all the excesses & power bloat of 5e & doesn’t fix anything that’s broken.
ToV was a disappointment to me. not bc it was a "5e clone" (i'd like a non-wotc 5e). but i was expecting a simpler set of rules like 5e was supposed to be in 2014 and ToV'd bring more complications than i was expecting.
That's an interesting take that I haven't heard before. I wonder how widespread the desire for a simpler 5E is?
Long live the ORC
And may the games published under said license prosper forevermore!
ToV just didn't fix enough of the issues of 5e to get away with being a clone. As is the game is just a 5e with less options, and some of the aesthetic is very meh. Right now their merit is just not being WotC and that isn't enough
An understandable response. I'm curious about what issues you would like to see fixed?
@CopperDragonGames As I kind of review information of ToV I think part of the issue was actually just that the initial playtests were really poorly put together, as one of my core complaints about 5e does look like it was addressed. That is fixing the fact that feats are clearly a core component of distinguishing your character but they run contrary to making your character more powerful through ASIs. It looks like they did make talents available with an attached +1.
My other issue with 5e I hadn't seen them address was the issue of magic item pricing, but perhaps they got to that too.
Correct
Hey Haircut! 😘
Too funny!
5e variant
too me - I've over 5e for a while and much prefer other games, and ToV just feels like homebrew 5e in my opinion so I won't be playing it.
Totally understandable. If you're not into 5E, it makes total sense to not be excited about an upgrade to that system. I hope you enjoy whatever game(s) you've switched to!
You talked about the game and we didn’t see it
Didn't see it where? It was at GenCon... it's on the shelves of game stores in my area... it's on my tabletop. I'm not sure what you mean.
I think nobody is talking about it because:
A) it's basically tweaked 5e, and **WotC is releasing its own** tweaked 5e, so you have two VERY SIMILAR products, and why go for the copy when you can go to the source?
B) the competition seems to not only be based on 5e, but improve upon it or add its own twist. You probably already own 5e, so why buy "basically 5e" when Pathfinder 2e, DC20, MCDM, Daggerheart have **more original ideas?**
Nothing special about it.
Au contraire, my friend! It is quite special indeed! 😃
@CopperDragonGames unfortunately, the trouble with all these 5e products is that it's still D&D almost like published homebrew rules. I like 5e played and ran it ever since it came out. Why would I switch. The big thing to look for is who is writing 3rd party content for it. I have now switched to Shadowdark