I pretty much never comment on anything, ever, but I'll make an exception for you. As a lot of DM/GM, D&D 5e is becoming a little bit frustrating to run each time and I tend to tweak and hombrew the rules more and more the ease the pain. So much in fact that I almost finished writing a complete different game system. (With quite the same liberating action economy, inspired from many boardgames, turn-based strategy games and others TTRPGs. Never considered to entirely drop the hit rolls tho !) It is wonderful to see that your rules change so much of the game momentum while also being able to keep using all the D&D collection with minimal modifications, in particular all the foes and monsters stats. One of the critical parts I am stuggling the most with on my own system ! Hat's off to you, mr.Diaz. Really well done. Can't wait to read the full pdf.
@@IdiotinGlans more is a good thing, I agree but this was another one of those stories about modding dnd so much it becomes almost a different system and feeling you have to do it because dnd is such a shitshow pathfinder 2e is an easy switch and its a way better system, the rules are more detailed and it doesnt leave the gm hanging at every other turn it was merely a suggestion, not meant as the ultimate solution I am just sick of every other time I look at something remotely interesting in online rpg stores and seeing another dnd mod that has so much work invested that it might be as well a new system, but isn't because riding of dnd is easier to get people to play it while at the same time wotc sees their customers as obstacle between them and 'their' money, treats their employees bad and tried (luckily unsuccesfully) to f*ck over the whole community
@@saschawiemann5293I agree. While Pathfinder 2e is the obvious choice, every GM should try different games to find the perfect system. Maybe Dungeon World? 13th Age? Something 5e like like Shadow of the demon lord/Shadow of the Weird Wizard. Straight up a better version of 5e like Advanced 5th Edition. Something OSR like Worlds Without Number? Something High Powered like Godbound or Exalted? An ACTUAL sci-fi game instead of D&D homebrew like Starfinder or Traveller? Heck, even old versions of D&D like 4e. Homebrew is not a bad thing, but if it takes more time to fix the system than actually use it, you're better off trying something else.
Fred: "Now, let's find out who this different combat system really is." _Pulls off the hood_ Velma: "Jinkies! Pathfinder 2e's 3-action economy!" PF2E3AE: "And I would've gotten away with it too, if it hadn't been for you meddling kids!"
Lol glad you said it, didn't want to be mean to the dude who created the video, but wanted to say congrats you discovered pathfinder 2e except with 4 sided dice.
@@Jason-qh2nw3 Action economy... Ring a bell? Other than that (which isn't something Pathfinder invented) it's just a bunch of cool ideas combined. Not of them new or revolutionary tho
@@lonewaffle231 Turns out he built a different game and raised a quarter million dollars to publish it on backerkit 🎊🎉 it’s still open for late pledges on the website if you’re interested
I think the 80/20 rule applies here. In my experience, there are two things that slow down gameplay much more than anything else combined: rolling for initiative and looking up spell descriptions. Anyway, "Players go first" = boring steamroll.
In playtesting, PCs starting with all 3AP it was a problem, but starting with fewer depending on the initiative roll, it was much more balanced. The idea is that the DM can weave in monsters turns where they make sense too.
@@nimbleCo What's the point in streamlining initiative to "players go first" if they still have to roll? In the video you mentioned that you'd save time with not rolling, but then rolling for initiative...still happens.
@@DemonLordRaidenbecause the thing that's slow about initiative isn't the rolling, it's determining the order. This initiative system rolls to determine starting AP, not order. The fight can literally start while other players are still rolling
@@LeFlamel True, but I think it will still slow down the fight, because the "who ever's ready first, goes first" rule means you still all have to roll to see how many actions you have, THEN you have to figure out what you can even do with them (because having 1 action vs having 2 or 3 will require you to do different things. Don't want do spend your turn moving forward if you can't also attack, for example) and THEN you have to yell "I know what I want to do - me first!" before combat can finally start. Also don't forget that: - some players might consistently be faster than others, in which case you effectively always have the same turn order - some builds will actively want to be first or last (don't want to buff the fighter AFTER he attacked or Healing Word him BEFORE he get's downed, after all) - which in turn can easily make the sitting order of your players balance relevant, which sounds really stupid - having all the players go first and then all the monsters makes for devastating turns on both sides, making it really hard to balance - if you separate monsters and players like that anyway, why don't you just give both sides shared initiative? That way the player that know already knows what to do will always go first, not just in the first round
The whole System reminds me of Lancer. It has the same System with players go first but then they alternate their attacks between the enemy and the PC. Really strong enemies can act twice in one round.
I think it’s D&D has a player facing character creation process, so once the players buy into D&D - you then have to sell them on that, or else “it’s the same *but*…”
@@aarondavidson4093 Makes sense. Which, I get, but I also don't because as someone who plays many systems, the switch ain't that hard lol. But I guess people have their thing.
This changes so much that it isn't 5e anymore. Which makes it better in my book. However if you're gonna change this much, you might as well take a look at other systems.
Lol, it’s really doesn’t, you can still use all dnd spells and weapon and stat lines , just the chance to wiff on combat round attacks is much less. You still have standard d20 resolution system for hit or missing stuff like strength and Dex checks , but dmg attacks are just more accurate. There are games like DC20 that are basically doing this as their dnd replacement but changing how weapons stats work and everything and adding stamina, this really is much closer than you’d think
I love seeing twists on the base assumptions of how combat in D&D works. I really applaud the effort to streamline some things, but I'm afraid it's not all upsides and swiftness. Not rolling for initiative may seem like a time-saver, but your players _do_ have to roll for initiative anyways and I guarantee you'll be reminding them how many AP they get for their first round, every time. I do like going clockwise though. I think I'm going to try something in the middle - Person who rolls highest goes first, and then it's clockwise from them. Helps everyone else remember when to get ready for their turn if they see the action happening on their right. Also, armor rules, when bonuses do and don't apply because of armor, what things do and don't take one of your AP... they're all rules to confer about and that will slow stuff down. I love that gambling your AP on reactions becomes a strategic facet, but I don't think real combat would go noticeably faster with this system. Players will still hem and haw about their options, scritch their chins as they look through their spells, ask you which ones take 1 or 2 AP...
The system (Nimble) is half-baked. I also like your idea of having the highest initiative going first them round the table after that. This way the highest roller still gets rewarded.
Okay, at the beginning you make it sound like you don't roll initiative and how the players go first and in the order of readiness. Then all the sudden you are talking about Stabs rolling high on his initiative. When did this happen?
Players still roll initiative (to tell how many AP they start their first turn with), but don't need to report it in to the DM, and neither does the DM need to arrange anyone's initiative order. Play can just *start* with whoever is ready first.
@@nimbleCo I think that point is a little vague in the video. Whoever is ready first goes first doesn't make that clear that they still roll. I think your reply above would be a good note to put over that part of the video for clarification. I like everything else about the video. :)
@@nimbleCo if that is the case then you still roll initiative and you speed up nothing. Not only that but it sounds kind of boring part of the whole point of dnd is the xhance to fail. If you always succeed then why not just narrate how the thing goes and skip the whole combat in the first place. You already basically decided by the party going first how the combat will go. No point for rolling damage or anything at all
Different in the sense that its strangly more complicated lol. Why would a wizard misty step when we could simply walk the same distance twice with 2 acrion points? Having initiative be always advantaged towards the party removes tenstion and possibly wipes an encounter before it starts. I can respect the attempt to streamline 5e combat, but this simply just needs to be refined into its own TTRPG. Also, a more prominent reason for dnd combat taking so long is players or DMs who dont know their character. That can just be fixed with about 20m of prep before the session.
@@billjaimez I was talking about at the beginning of combat. When Book's first turn, having one 1 AP, casted misty step, instead of just moving. My point being that with these new rules, part of misty steps function becomes redundant. I feel like alot of features in dnd would clash similarly using this rule set. That's why I suggested that this system should be made into its own ttrpg game system, not an add-on for 5e.
I don't like that the character's attributes don't influence the rolls, and neither does the opponent's. This looks like the best way to play is to use the best weapons for each situation, the character himself being useless.
@@SkittleBombs maybe, in the video's logic, a fat guy with a sword and an athletic guy with a sword are the same, they both have the same chances to hit and cause damage. Same for a trained swordsman and a completely beginner.
@@yuri_art_92 sure abstracting accuracy for speed at the table may lose some definition of character being skilled. But you still need stats to gain advantage and perform non-combat rolls
@@SkittleBombshowever the incentive is basically gone to ever push for Strength. Other than Athletics, Grappling, and Jumping…Strength is just objectively weaker than ever other skill. I would never need stack strength over Con in this format as a Melee combatant. I also think this heavily rewards classes that can grant themselves advantage. I’m also curious how this works with the GWM and SS feats.
I think the issue with doing attack rolls with damage dice is that your majorly changing the statistics of a critical hit versus a miss. On a d20 you are only one in 20 shot of getting a one. On a D4 you now have a 25% chance of a critical failure
Yes, but a d20 can give very high non crit rolls, where a d4 cant. It actually makes sense to me, for the weapon. A dagger is either going to miss due to it's length(1), hit superficially (2 or 3), or hit an artery(4). A mega ultra longsword with a d12, for instance, has a much lower chance to miss, and crit (youre going to find a small weak spot with a steel surfboard?) But the overall damage is much higher. It perfectly balances criticals with avg dmg
Because combat is faster paced, you get to make a lot more attacks, (especially if you attack several times on a turn), so it's not a problem that you will miss frequently, unless you're attacking a weak enemy and it would kinda suck to have a 1/4 chance to miss some random mook. That does, though, encourage you to carry several weapons and switch, and gives STR characters (higher damage dice) better chances against low-hp enemies, which makes sense if you think of the burly barbarian sweeping through the goblins and the rouge backstabbing the heavily-armored boss.
It's not like 5e weapon design is great ny any means but this changes the whole dynamic of the weapons. It also makes it so that ac doesn't matter with hits and changes the whole game balance. Essentially a different game altogether.
Very cool and interesting idea but it changes so much within 5e that I fear it may break a lot of the system and would fair better as it's own thing. Someone else mentioned it but for example, misty step as a bonus action isn't needed in cases where you don't need to disengage an enemy or get across a gap etc. You could just move twice with 2 AP. This itself isn't a huge issue, just a slight nerf of Misty Step but I imagine there are countless similar situations to be found with this hack. My main issues with it off the cuff are, 1) damage die and therefore weapon determines the attack chance of the character over their inherent skill, it practically makes characters entire sheet useless 2) D4 having a 25% chance to fail or Crit is in a way, even more swingy than D20 despite less outcomes. You'll be hitting crits or failing constantly like a headless chicken. It would appear like the character has no control over what he's doing from one moment to the next, completely at the mercy of the roll. One second an incredible fighter, the next a complete incompetent fool. The weight of choices in the character creation now matter far less and I don't think that such a mechanic would be overall as fun as it would be frustrating. People want some level of consistency. 3) Not sure how magic weapons would work like +1, +2 etc. as stats don't affect rolls to hit. 4) How does sneak attack work in this system? If d4 has higher crit chance to offset other weapons higher average damage, what about when you consistently roll 4's and deal 6d6 sneak attack damage too? And does crit chance affect those? If you roll 6 on them does that crit again and again? That'd make Rogue the strongest in the game besides maybe Paladins. 5) Always having player's go first feels a little meh. It's not a huge issue, just not for me. Less of a criticism, more of a personal preference. 6) Reactions: If you can take multiple reactions in a turn, that would mean multiple abilities and spells all happening together in one turn that aren't meant to be stacked leading to possibly unforeseen game breaking moments. 7) If you streamline the game by removing Initiative but then require an Initiative roll anyway to determine AP, is that really speeding up play? I guess a little and I do hate how initiative interrupts the flow of combat but that said, do you roll initiative every single round in this hack to determine AP? If so, that would actually end up taking more time overall in a typical fight vs D&D rules for initiative once at the beginning. 8) if normal out of combat situations still use a D20 and stats as normal, there's a big disconnect between combat and out of combat resolution mechanics which could confuse people a lot. 9) Going back to the hitting and missing, it appears unlikely to ever miss which does speed up the gameplay and is offset by damage reduction but some may not enjoy the concept. The biggest issue being that a character who pulls out a dagger they are proficient in, will get no added bonus if I'm understanding correctly from the video and will also go from having a super low chance to miss with Greataxe for example to suddenly missing quite regularly with the d4 weapon. The character's actual skill once again fails to factor into the situation. A fighter trained in war shouldn't suddenly become less likely to hit due to changing their weapon. Overall though, I think the basic ideas are cool. 3 point Pathfinder 2e type economy, more freedom on a turn to gain more movement or do more interesting things rather than confined to "this needs this specific action type to use." Also love the interpose and being able to choose when to absorb damage. I homebrewed the interpose ability pretty much identically in my own games a few years back, felt it adds much more teamwork and a sense of self-sacrifice to the game. Saving someone at a cost. I loved that and really like the implementation here. I think this is a really cool idea though and if I ever have spare time I'll check out the free core rules for sure. That said, I feel it could almost be better off as it's own game but 5e sells and has the biggest fanbase so all the best with the module.
I have some what implemented these rules with some changes to make it feel more stable. 1. you add your modifiers to attack rolls and get to re roll if you miss if you have proficiency in that weapon. 2. Ac is the amount of damage you block as a reaction(you use one of your actions but you can block your ac worth of damage as many times as your dex modifier ) you take the excess damage if the total of the attack surpasses your AC but only if all the attacks from a attackers are blocked 3. Guard breaking, if you block an attack the attacker has a chance to break your guard with a opposing save of some kind of this works you can’t block again till your turn 4. Most monsters have a multi attack or do more damage They seem a little complex but they have balanced the rules and at least for my table work fine
I don't think i will use theses rules, sound just like a totally new game to me. But your video kept me hooked for the entire duration and your editing is very very good. I'm subscribed and will wait for more videos. Your channel have everything to grow fast, congrats.
I love this. going to try and implement it myself. Onlly error with your example story, misty step is a leveled spell, meaning it should take 2 aciton points, but the wizard only had one (I assume cause he is in the dying condition).
The way you modified the action economy is really similar to the DC20 system and the stacking crits is exactly like righteous fury from Dark Heresy which is my favorite RPG! I love how your rules are streamlined yet still more flexible than 5E and the video editing was excellent at delivering your ideas. Great job!
This deserves a system of its own, the rest of DnD was designed for standard combat rules, so you'll eventually run into conflicts, such as having a bonus to initiative that no longer matters. Also, I think it's weird to have it where the more sides of your damage die, the less likely you are to miss, a better alternative would be to just roll to hit and then deal average damage.
The bonus to initiative means that you're more likely to have higher AP on your first turn. It is a little strange that it's harder to miss with a bigger weapon (We usually envision something like a warhammer (1d10) or a greataxe (1d12) to be easy to jump away from, but here they have some of the lowest chances to miss)
@@godminnette2 I've always been curious about PF2e, but the system has so many things i don't like. Discovered DC20 two weeks ago and it indeed looks to be the best of both worlds, and more.
You'd be better off with a different RPG system. 5E's convoluted rules and power bloat leads to everyone tinkering with it. As a result players are learning a 5E hacked system over and over again everytime they play with a different DM. There are other RPGs that do not require as much work to make it workable so you only have to learn the new system once instead over and over again...
Seems like it could be fun to try, looking at the preview there was one issue I thought of. Since enemies with over 12 ac dont take your stat mod damage then it removes insentives for most martial players to ever increase their main stat and they would only ever choose full feats.
The problem in my opinion is having to choose between stat increase and feats each time. If I had to run a game, I'd treat feats like exp or loot and award them as a consequence of a character's actions in game, such as after a significant achievement, stage of their character arc, special training or consistent playstyle
@@davidedevincentis5444 I do believe that is actually one way feats and such can be granted to a player. And there are still half-feats that award a stat increase and ability of some sort. For instance I would often take Heavy Armor feat as a wizard cause one way or another im frontlining!
I like the initiative order. After that, it seems like a different game system than DnD. As mentioned before it seems more like Pathfinder 2e. That being said if it works for you and your group more power to you.
It's just Pathfinder 2e wearing 5e as a skin, honestly I do think this is such a sudden shift with balance and encounter design that changes a lot of the mechanical feel of 5e that honestly might be just better off playing PF2e for a more crunch game or some more rules-light or OSR adjacent game for more simple approach to things. Btw I love your videos Bonewizard do keep them up! Can't wait for part 2 of the Monk
It's similar to pf2e in the same way 5e has an economy. Yes, it's... *there*, but the inspiration stops at having vaguely heard of the subject matter. This has none of the things that makes pf2's three action system as engaging as it is
I love this. I want to run a game based on Bloodborne and I really want to get across that fast paced combat, and this works great for that I think, it also means that more combats can happen in one session
these rule sets are cool, and really fit for a different game I am sure this would work for many tables, but the speed of things isn't always as important, I find, especially with more strategic parties. But that does not mean that it never fits, and I hope other DMs can use these rules well
I'm OK with my 5e combat, but this is a great video, would love expand a system based on it. Always up for a new system. Instant subscription man, good stuff.
Ankheg are normally large monstrosities but you call it a medium armored monster, is this a change made by he nimble rules? Do monsters not get to reduce damage from their armor? If there is no rolling initiative how are the wizard, dwarf and kobold coming up with their initiative scores? Wouldn't all players use daggers since there is a 25% chance of stacking damage dice on a crit? It also seems unlikely that the ankheg would be on the verge of death and not use its acid spray attack to target multiple foes, is this just DM incompetence?
Caught me! Except for the adventure modules that are still 5e, and the classes, subclasses, spells, items, monsters, other supplements... pretty much everything is still 5e, just streamlined. I don't know how to play Pathfinder, I've got the books, but was overwhelmed by the complexity and fiddlyness. Pathfinder is the opposite direction I'm taking ;)
All of these ideas are fun, but at some point when you change *so much* of the game, it's literally just a different game. Even little stuff like "didnt have to confirm with the DM". Confirming with the DM takes 5 seconds. 10 at most. At the end of the night, we might have saved whole *minutes*.
“With some minor changes” Proceeds to completely disregard hit modifiers, armorer class, the traditional action style, and death saves and fundamentally alters and undermines 50 other mechanics such as the entire functionality of basically any magic armor or shields
This changes 5e so damn much it isn't even the same game anymore. The entire math and balance is now wack, sure I guess it can work but I won't lie sounds like a pain to deal with on the DM side. As someone who plays online and run games through discord Avrae and Owlbear, tracking HP and AC ain't a problem, it's more so players not knowing how to play and or not reading lol
@@Evendur6748 I completely agree simply rebalancing ac is a pain for the dm having to adjust at each new combat all of this together is a nightmare not to mention the 100 unintentional interactions what happens when someone pulls a vorpal sword you just gonna insta kill everyone?
How does this affect the action economy problem of big solo monsters in 5e? Do you still need to give them legendary actions? Do monsters not required the dodge action? From the video it seems like the bug had "medium armor" but the rogue ignored it with a crit; wouldn't the first attack from the dwarf interact with the bug's armor in any way?
Monsters are largely ran exactly same, any 5e compatible monster works. That said, legendary actions are basically Action Points. If you wanted a more challenging Legendary/Solo/Boss monsters fight, giving them an action after each PC works really well for differing party sizes & encounter balance. Check the free preview out: www.kickstarter.com/projects/nimblerpg/nimble-streamlining-your-5e-game?ref=bjz6a8 for the rules for monsters. The dwarf's first attack at 2:48 he rolls a 6 and deals that much damage (he doesn't add his STR modifier since the Ankheg's medium armor ignores a player's stat mod). Elegantly simulating reduced damage from a higher AC, but also speeding up play and reducing the mathematical load.
Long time DM here: Run big solo monsters EXACTLY like several smaller monsters rolled into one guy. Give them multiple attacks and move options, just stagger them through the round. You can even roll multiple initiatives. You can (and probably should most of the time) have the BOSS lose those actions at various HP breakpoints. Narratively you just say the big guy is starting to tire, and can't sustain the speed he had at first.
@@chawk1637 Thanks for the tips, I'm on the action oriented monsters ship since a while back. My question was to gage wether or not this hack fixes the core issues like PF2e, given that it touches on action economy, but apparently it doesn't.
Kept the adventure modules, the monsters, the classes & sub classes, spells, weapons items, feats, abilities... pretty much everything, just trimmed the fat a bit :D
Lol, you went and trimmed the d20 from the d20 game. No offense, but it kinda reminds me of d6 systems like blades in the dark and dungeon world with the speed of the actions. I am curious as to what else was really changed outside of combat@@nimbleCo On a separate note, I also think this nimble system could work greatly with games like blades in the dark to make combat a bit more structured. Love the premise.
@@redviego6714 Fully agreed. I get not wanting to use certain things, but at some point you should just use another system. Nimble's a pretty cool idea, but it definitely would have worked better (imo, obviously) with a game like Blades.
First of all, this is PF2e without initiative(And some other modifications). Second of all, if you gotta change this much to enjoy DnD with your friends, then it's time for you and your friends to pick up a different game. Trust me, I spent an insane amount of time modifying DnD to my liking before realizing I could just find a different game that better suits my DMing style and needs.
Honestly, it's an interesting idea for how to handle damage/attack rolls for a fresh system. As a lot of others have said though, this deviates so much from DND that I wouldn't really consider it DND at this point--which, also as others have said, I wouldn't really consider a bad thing. Though, for 5e, it winds up negating or having weird interactions with a lot of features that it might feel bad if you have a player who planned to use those kind of abilities. I've been observing and trying systems like the MCDM RPG, Lancer, ICON, etc. and seeing how they handle and resolve skills, rolls, and damage, and how it differs from D20 based systems (if at all), so this is definitely going into the inspiration toolbox for when I one day decide to try and craft a system myself.
Dungeon Coach's DC 20 is definitely listed as one of the many inspirations on the opening page. DC20 looks like it's going to be a cool system, but it strays far enough away from 5e that all my adventures and classes and monster books etc. won't work. He's got some great ideas, but a bit fiddly from what I've seen so far.
@@nimbleCoit's pretty much DC20 for 5e. The only real difference is damage dice, which is pretty cool, but also the only way to DC20 could work with 5e health pools (damage has to be a lot higher).
@@eddieblanton2981 There would be one of 2 ways to convert DC20 to 5e, add damage dice (like they did) or increase the base damage and the Heavy damage.
Players experience lvl has a hugh part on how fast combat goes! Plus to all DM's ac, ability check or spell dc dont have to be a big secret helps speed up things while sticking with the rules!
Sure! I'm actually looking for someone with more experience with OSR than I have to help make a OSR compatible version. send me an email if you'd like to chat
@@nimbleCoWell, I'd love to talk about this! Given I'd be able to design a whole system around this set of mechanics, there would be ways to make it even more streamlined! Also, to what email can I write?
Yes! So much yes! I was working on a similar system. Hit points is described as fatigue and such. So why wouldn't you be depleted HP each round of combat. At the end of a combat you would heal your total HD pool, minus the number of combat rounds.
This is what I do. If a player starts their action within 30 seconds of their turn starting, they get to add 1d4 to either their attack roll or damage. If their attack roll is over 5 the monsters AC, they get to add 1d4. If their action is unique and not the same as the previous (unless its a regular attack, they need to describe it in a cool different way) they get to use another d4 on their attack. So, if they go fast, do a unique attack, and hit over 5 of the monsters AC, they can add 3 d4's to their attack.
It’s wild how many people can hear a thing, think they understand it completely, then trash that thing. All without ever having tried it! Hats off to the creators!
I feel like people overlook the physical ways in which you can reduce the time it takes at the table. Everyone is rolling initiative and it's at the same time. A DM can pre-roll initiatives for encounters they know will happen. So the process is not that slow. D&D's fundamental math has certain results. You don't need to add your modifiers to your attack if you rolled a 2. Or an 18. You can very quickly guess the AC. While you're "waiting for permission", you can just roll damage while the DM checks if it hit.
So I had an idea because the realized the issues that some people brought up - that monsters going at the end means a steamroll (either the players killing them all, or the enemies swarming all at once and TPKing) and that it makes seating arrangements matter which is kinda dumb. So, what about doing Popcorn Initiative? Whoever's ready goes first still but instead of going clockwise they can choose whoever's turn goes next - including the enemies. It adds another strategic layer because, sure, you would rather not want to be stabbed by the enemy but you also don't want them all to go at the end and swarm you.
This is way cool. I've switched over to Shadowdark (haven't started yet, but in planning), but I'm wondering if it will have the same issues and I can adapt this.
This gave me some good tips. as the campaign I DM climbs higher in levels, some of these tips will help me improve gameplay. My players are too eager with the higher level massive attacks and damage to want to change combat, but the exhaustion could help out as I crank up the baddies.
An easy way to fix many of these problem is to just roll for initiative in advance for monster and setting up the initiative order. For spells, if someone is looking during others turn what his spells do, i find it pretty fast. Still, at our table we like the traditional system, even if this looks pretty fun
Great video! I agree with most of the things here, and have used a variant of it for a while. Speeding up the pacing of combat is great, i thought i would just throw a few tweeks ive found from ridiculous things my players have done: A. Action economy for the enemies is important. Looks like the monster has arround 3 actions here which works, but smaller hords like Goblins and Gnolls get tedious like this. Try giving them one action each. B. That one spell: Haste. Breaks so much stuff. C. Pets like familers and Warlocks Pact of the Chain need 1 action, or the pet has to use the characters actions. And finally D. Never let them use AP for Bonus actions. It might make sense, but it allows for allot of setup from buff spells and the ability to spam Healing Word. There are more than this, but these are the main things to consider. I hope you do a follow-up on this!
What does the "extra attack" feature do in this system? Two attacks with one action point? Or simply that your multiple attack penalty is negated for one additional attack?
this is very interesting as i just finished learning about DC20 which takes the opposite direction, getting rid of the damage dice. instead, every 5th point above success gives an extra point of damage. which is nicely streamlined, but im not ready to say goodbye to six other dice of different sizes, your proposition i actually like more
I could also incorperate a buffing attacks idea i had recently, using small spells like cantrips to fuel another spell or an attack with additional power. For example, a spellcaster using fireball and then adding the gust cantrip in order to literally add fuel for the fire, thereby buffing the attack with possibly an additional attack die. Or a spellcaster using a 1 action point reaction with ray of frost to give the barbarian a cold damage variant of his greataxe swing to avoid slashing resistance.
Nice video, I think a good solution for dnd 5e combat system would be players that remain focus on the game, that remembers when their turn is and that knows rules and what their characters can do (yeah, even the spells).
But still. I think that dnd is now t supposed to be about remembering a lot of stats and rules and stuff like that. It’s about the cool combat moments and character interactions. This is a game not a job. And this system does add a some interesting simple strategy that some 5e combat lacks. And some players aren’t capable or don’t want to remember 8 different numbers at all time.
The best combat i had was in COS. We were fighting an evil tree and i combined giant's might with enlarge to match its size, and the party's vampire bloodhunter learned its weakness. So, I pucked her up and as a proxy, i helped remove that weakness. It was a contest between my +3 str with advantage against that tree's +4 con with advantage.
You mentioned how as a reaction you can reduce damage by AC - 8 With that in mind, to reduce the math done on the spot, could a player just reduce their AC by 8 on their character sheet? Is the original AC needed for anything with these alternate rules? Thank-you for your time.
Yep, there is an updated character sheet to make that easier. Original AC isn't used for much at all, just like the big Attribute Score numbers, only the modifier is used.
You're applying many modern design methods like 1 roll resolution, exploding dice and X action system Which is really cool, but I wonder if there was not a space for Nimble as a standalone system
Turns out there was, and he built a different game and raised a quarter million dollars to publish it on backerkit 🎊🎉 it’s still open for late pledges on the website if you’re interested
Looked into this with a friend. We noticed that it really nerfs casters. With their low AC they would have a hard time negating any damage, and they would have less AP than melee classes since it would cost them 2 AP to cast a non cantrip spell, while melee attacks or abilities only take 1 AP. And with the AP cost like that, a melee class with the Dying condition would still be a threat, while a caster class with the Dying condition would be stuck to cantrips. I think there's some good ideas here, but it still very much needs some work. But if it's for a melee campaign, then it would be good.
Interesting idea, but this just becomes a simplified Pathfinder basically. I like the crunch but I will take that crit mechanic as I do not like giving basic +1,2, 3 weapons which kesds me to making homebrew. Ultimately I prefer having little combat though so some heaviness is good.
I've been using this system with my players and they've been absolutely loving it. One thing I haven't been able to find much of in these comments is questions about specific feats and things of the such that might conflict with this system. How would something like great weapon fighting work? How about the Sharpshooter feat? My solutions have just been adjusting them slightly on a whim to fit the system, and there's probably more im not aware of.
Great video! I’ll definitely try this with my group! Question: Is there a good way to make armor class a passive thing? I don’t know how I feel about making it an action.
The only real problem I have with this is the system relies on players not being prepared. As a wizard main myself, if I'm going first it's fairly easy to determine what spell I'd want to use (a control spell, like command at low levels and wall of force at high levels). The idea of rolling initiative is to try to prevent creatures that don't have dex or a specific ability (at the cost of another ability, such as the alert feat) to offset a lower dex in initiative. This system rewards attentiveness, which is honestly amazing and would help keep tables on track, but if players are paying attention then it becomes interruptive as everyone tries to get the first action in or players could set up in advance who goes first, completely bypassing the reason initiative exists, and throw a group combo. A rule I've seen before that accomplishes much of what this video tries to solve is simply rolling initiative either one time at the beginning of the session or if you're looking to start combats faster without interruption initiative can be rolled at the end of the encounter in preparation for the next. If it's the length of each turn that is causing issue a timer/stopwatch works fabulously. Dnd (at least 5e) doesn't go kindly with the action point based system because (as said in the video a cantrip is one action point) casting three cantrips is going to be way more damage than any other spell. If a caster is limited in the number of cantrips what about a combo of a bonus action spell, a cantrip, and attacking. If that's the system you want to play Pathfinder is already set up for this and the two systems are very similar.
@@captaindudeman3613 Which means you can cast two leveled spells in one turn. 5th level healing word + grande attack spell here we come. Or a warlock could cast three eldritch blasts in one turn (I assume). Not borked at all.
@@AlexPBentonMostly everything, there’s no way to properly balance it players get frustrated, and in this case a lot of class features don’t work, like how does dread ambusher function, how do most spells work now? It’s a different system trying to be dnd, it just isn’t fun
Turns out it worked so we he built an entire stand alone game and raised a quarter million dollars to publish it on backerkit 🎊🎉 it’s still open for late pledges on the website if you’re interested
Ive been playing with this, its really fun. I used to be in a game where i could go have a cigarette break after hitting sneak attack wirh my rogue and come back and still not be my turn
I think this might be a good way to introduce the game to new players or something like that however 1.) having players all go at the start punished them because multiple enemies in a row having turns allows them to do a lot more before player reaction 2.) quieter players will always be last in combat 3.) the AP system and quickened hit rolls would majorly favor some classes over others. Again cool way to play a more loosely goosey game but it would be really imbalanced and most likely leave some players feeling like background decoration for their main character party member that does everything
Good Stuff! Electric Bastionland and its related RPG Into the Odd roll damage straight up as well. You should check those systems out. Very well known in the indie rpg scene.
I pretty much never comment on anything, ever, but I'll make an exception for you.
As a lot of DM/GM, D&D 5e is becoming a little bit frustrating to run each time and I tend to tweak and hombrew the rules more and more the ease the pain. So much in fact that I almost finished writing a complete different game system. (With quite the same liberating action economy, inspired from many boardgames, turn-based strategy games and others TTRPGs. Never considered to entirely drop the hit rolls tho !)
It is wonderful to see that your rules change so much of the game momentum while also being able to keep using all the D&D collection with minimal modifications, in particular all the foes and monsters stats. One of the critical parts I am stuggling the most with on my own system !
Hat's off to you, mr.Diaz. Really well done. Can't wait to read the full pdf.
Publish your rewrite as a new game.
try some pathfinder 2e
@@saschawiemann5293Pathfinder shouldn't be the end of the conversation, more rpgs is always a good thing
@@IdiotinGlans more is a good thing, I agree
but this was another one of those stories about modding dnd so much it becomes almost a different system and feeling you have to do it because dnd is such a shitshow
pathfinder 2e is an easy switch and its a way better system, the rules are more detailed and it doesnt leave the gm hanging at every other turn
it was merely a suggestion, not meant as the ultimate solution
I am just sick of every other time I look at something remotely interesting in online rpg stores and seeing another dnd mod that has so much work invested that it might be as well a new system, but isn't because riding of dnd is easier to get people to play it while at the same time wotc sees their customers as obstacle between them and 'their' money, treats their employees bad and tried (luckily unsuccesfully) to f*ck over the whole community
@@saschawiemann5293I agree. While Pathfinder 2e is the obvious choice, every GM should try different games to find the perfect system. Maybe Dungeon World? 13th Age? Something 5e like like Shadow of the demon lord/Shadow of the Weird Wizard. Straight up a better version of 5e like Advanced 5th Edition. Something OSR like Worlds Without Number? Something High Powered like Godbound or Exalted? An ACTUAL sci-fi game instead of D&D homebrew like Starfinder or Traveller? Heck, even old versions of D&D like 4e.
Homebrew is not a bad thing, but if it takes more time to fix the system than actually use it, you're better off trying something else.
Fred: "Now, let's find out who this different combat system really is."
_Pulls off the hood_
Velma: "Jinkies! Pathfinder 2e's 3-action economy!"
PF2E3AE: "And I would've gotten away with it too, if it hadn't been for you meddling kids!"
🤣
And his partner Savage Worlds "Aces" mechanic.
Pathfinder still makes you roll to hit, tho.
Lol glad you said it, didn't want to be mean to the dude who created the video, but wanted to say congrats you discovered pathfinder 2e except with 4 sided dice.
@@brandonschannel4267 Aside 3 actions this is nothing like Pathfinder.
Friend, this isn't a combat hack, this is basically a new system.
One that sounds really interesting, actually.
Yeah it's called Pathfinder 2nd edition
@@MSTNocte this is nothing like Pathfinder 2e what are you smoking
@@Jason-qh2nw3 Action economy... Ring a bell? Other than that (which isn't something Pathfinder invented) it's just a bunch of cool ideas combined. Not of them new or revolutionary tho
@@lonewaffle231 Turns out he built a different game and raised a quarter million dollars to publish it on backerkit 🎊🎉 it’s still open for late pledges on the website if you’re interested
I think the 80/20 rule applies here. In my experience, there are two things that slow down gameplay much more than anything else combined: rolling for initiative and looking up spell descriptions.
Anyway, "Players go first" = boring steamroll.
In playtesting, PCs starting with all 3AP it was a problem, but starting with fewer depending on the initiative roll, it was much more balanced. The idea is that the DM can weave in monsters turns where they make sense too.
@@nimbleCo What's the point in streamlining initiative to "players go first" if they still have to roll? In the video you mentioned that you'd save time with not rolling, but then rolling for initiative...still happens.
@@DemonLordRaidenbecause the thing that's slow about initiative isn't the rolling, it's determining the order. This initiative system rolls to determine starting AP, not order. The fight can literally start while other players are still rolling
@@LeFlamel True, but I think it will still slow down the fight, because the "who ever's ready first, goes first" rule means you still all have to roll to see how many actions you have, THEN you have to figure out what you can even do with them (because having 1 action vs having 2 or 3 will require you to do different things. Don't want do spend your turn moving forward if you can't also attack, for example) and THEN you have to yell "I know what I want to do - me first!" before combat can finally start.
Also don't forget that:
- some players might consistently be faster than others, in which case you effectively always have the same turn order
- some builds will actively want to be first or last (don't want to buff the fighter AFTER he attacked or Healing Word him BEFORE he get's downed, after all)
- which in turn can easily make the sitting order of your players balance relevant, which sounds really stupid
- having all the players go first and then all the monsters makes for devastating turns on both sides, making it really hard to balance
- if you separate monsters and players like that anyway, why don't you just give both sides shared initiative? That way the player that know already knows what to do will always go first, not just in the first round
The whole System reminds me of Lancer.
It has the same System with players go first but then they alternate their attacks between the enemy and the PC. Really strong enemies can act twice in one round.
It's like watching someone discover that other TTRPGs exist.
He's a bit confused but he's got the spirit
I am always amazed at the lengths people go to in order to avoid playing anything other than D&D.
"People are more likely to write a 300 page overhaul to D&D than just learn a new game". Truer words have never been spoken.
I think it’s D&D has a player facing character creation process, so once the players buy into D&D - you then have to sell them on that, or else “it’s the same *but*…”
@@aarondavidson4093 What do you mean?
@@turtlecheese8 players get married to the system because of the depth of content for builds, which makes them reluctant to change system entirely.
@@aarondavidson4093 Makes sense. Which, I get, but I also don't because as someone who plays many systems, the switch ain't that hard lol. But I guess people have their thing.
This looks more like some strange mix of primarily Dragonbane with a sprinkle of PF2e than it does 5e but seems like it could be interesting at least.
This changes so much that it isn't 5e anymore.
Which makes it better in my book.
However if you're gonna change this much, you might as well take a look at other systems.
Ya i agree. This isnt a hack its s rework. Without this info written down how can my table keep these rules consistent.
Lol, it’s really doesn’t, you can still use all dnd spells and weapon and stat lines , just the chance to wiff on combat round attacks is much less. You still have standard d20 resolution system for hit or missing stuff like strength and Dex checks , but dmg attacks are just more accurate. There are games like DC20 that are basically doing this as their dnd replacement but changing how weapons stats work and everything and adding stamina, this really is much closer than you’d think
Exactly
@@SkittleBombs this changes waaaay too much. You don't know much about the balance of the game if you can't see it.
Exactly this, this changes about half of the PHB. Why would you go that far when you can just play system with combat you would like?
I love seeing twists on the base assumptions of how combat in D&D works. I really applaud the effort to streamline some things, but I'm afraid it's not all upsides and swiftness. Not rolling for initiative may seem like a time-saver, but your players _do_ have to roll for initiative anyways and I guarantee you'll be reminding them how many AP they get for their first round, every time. I do like going clockwise though. I think I'm going to try something in the middle - Person who rolls highest goes first, and then it's clockwise from them. Helps everyone else remember when to get ready for their turn if they see the action happening on their right.
Also, armor rules, when bonuses do and don't apply because of armor, what things do and don't take one of your AP... they're all rules to confer about and that will slow stuff down. I love that gambling your AP on reactions becomes a strategic facet, but I don't think real combat would go noticeably faster with this system. Players will still hem and haw about their options, scritch their chins as they look through their spells, ask you which ones take 1 or 2 AP...
The system (Nimble) is half-baked. I also like your idea of having the highest initiative going first them round the table after that. This way the highest roller still gets rewarded.
Okay, at the beginning you make it sound like you don't roll initiative and how the players go first and in the order of readiness. Then all the sudden you are talking about Stabs rolling high on his initiative. When did this happen?
Players still roll initiative (to tell how many AP they start their first turn with), but don't need to report it in to the DM, and neither does the DM need to arrange anyone's initiative order. Play can just *start* with whoever is ready first.
@@nimbleCo Ok, that makes sense. Thanks for the clarification. :)
@@nimbleCo I think that point is a little vague in the video. Whoever is ready first goes first doesn't make that clear that they still roll. I think your reply above would be a good note to put over that part of the video for clarification. I like everything else about the video. :)
@@nimbleCo if that is the case then you still roll initiative and you speed up nothing. Not only that but it sounds kind of boring part of the whole point of dnd is the xhance to fail. If you always succeed then why not just narrate how the thing goes and skip the whole combat in the first place. You already basically decided by the party going first how the combat will go. No point for rolling damage or anything at all
@@davidmoseley1082if your encounters end after one round, you need to dial up the challenge.
Different in the sense that its strangly more complicated lol.
Why would a wizard misty step when we could simply walk the same distance twice with 2 acrion points?
Having initiative be always advantaged towards the party removes tenstion and possibly wipes an encounter before it starts.
I can respect the attempt to streamline 5e combat, but this simply just needs to be refined into its own TTRPG.
Also, a more prominent reason for dnd combat taking so long is players or DMs who dont know their character. That can just be fixed with about 20m of prep before the session.
Wasn't the wizard in the grappled? Also when at 0 HP he only has 1 AP. Lastly misty step is fun why walk when you can misty step.
@@billjaimez I was talking about at the beginning of combat. When Book's first turn, having one 1 AP, casted misty step, instead of just moving.
My point being that with these new rules, part of misty steps function becomes redundant.
I feel like alot of features in dnd would clash similarly using this rule set.
That's why I suggested that this system should be made into its own ttrpg game system, not an add-on for 5e.
I don't like that the character's attributes don't influence the rolls, and neither does the opponent's.
This looks like the best way to play is to use the best weapons for each situation, the character himself being useless.
Yeah I’d probably mash this and ICRPG together as that game has all weapons on 1d6 dmg dice
You could use you stats to secure and advantage maybe doing Dex or int/Wis checks to narrate something that means the attack starts with advantage.
@@SkittleBombs maybe, in the video's logic, a fat guy with a sword and an athletic guy with a sword are the same, they both have the same chances to hit and cause damage. Same for a trained swordsman and a completely beginner.
@@yuri_art_92 sure abstracting accuracy for speed at the table may lose some definition of character being skilled. But you still need stats to gain advantage and perform non-combat rolls
@@SkittleBombshowever the incentive is basically gone to ever push for Strength. Other than Athletics, Grappling, and Jumping…Strength is just objectively weaker than ever other skill.
I would never need stack strength over Con in this format as a Melee combatant.
I also think this heavily rewards classes that can grant themselves advantage.
I’m also curious how this works with the GWM and SS feats.
I think the issue with doing attack rolls with damage dice is that your majorly changing the statistics of a critical hit versus a miss. On a d20 you are only one in 20 shot of getting a one. On a D4 you now have a 25% chance of a critical failure
Yes, but a d20 can give very high non crit rolls, where a d4 cant. It actually makes sense to me, for the weapon. A dagger is either going to miss due to it's length(1), hit superficially (2 or 3), or hit an artery(4). A mega ultra longsword with a d12, for instance, has a much lower chance to miss, and crit (youre going to find a small weak spot with a steel surfboard?) But the overall damage is much higher. It perfectly balances criticals with avg dmg
Because combat is faster paced, you get to make a lot more attacks, (especially if you attack several times on a turn), so it's not a problem that you will miss frequently, unless you're attacking a weak enemy and it would kinda suck to have a 1/4 chance to miss some random mook.
That does, though, encourage you to carry several weapons and switch, and gives STR characters (higher damage dice) better chances against low-hp enemies, which makes sense if you think of the burly barbarian sweeping through the goblins and the rouge backstabbing the heavily-armored boss.
This is the best part of this and for me, the only part I care about tbh
@@samanthamagi6849 Full sword combat is much faster than you'd think, this is a good clip to demonstrate. th-cam.com/users/shortss8xy-iWYfXQ
It's not like 5e weapon design is great ny any means but this changes the whole dynamic of the weapons. It also makes it so that ac doesn't matter with hits and changes the whole game balance.
Essentially a different game altogether.
This is basically a whole new game. You should write it.
Great idea and he did it! 🎊🎉 it’s still open for late pledges on the website if you’re interested
Very cool and interesting idea but it changes so much within 5e that I fear it may break a lot of the system and would fair better as it's own thing. Someone else mentioned it but for example, misty step as a bonus action isn't needed in cases where you don't need to disengage an enemy or get across a gap etc. You could just move twice with 2 AP. This itself isn't a huge issue, just a slight nerf of Misty Step but I imagine there are countless similar situations to be found with this hack.
My main issues with it off the cuff are,
1) damage die and therefore weapon determines the attack chance of the character over their inherent skill, it practically makes characters entire sheet useless
2) D4 having a 25% chance to fail or Crit is in a way, even more swingy than D20 despite less outcomes. You'll be hitting crits or failing constantly like a headless chicken. It would appear like the character has no control over what he's doing from one moment to the next, completely at the mercy of the roll. One second an incredible fighter, the next a complete incompetent fool. The weight of choices in the character creation now matter far less and I don't think that such a mechanic would be overall as fun as it would be frustrating. People want some level of consistency.
3) Not sure how magic weapons would work like +1, +2 etc. as stats don't affect rolls to hit.
4) How does sneak attack work in this system? If d4 has higher crit chance to offset other weapons higher average damage, what about when you consistently roll 4's and deal 6d6 sneak attack damage too? And does crit chance affect those? If you roll 6 on them does that crit again and again? That'd make Rogue the strongest in the game besides maybe Paladins.
5) Always having player's go first feels a little meh. It's not a huge issue, just not for me. Less of a criticism, more of a personal preference.
6) Reactions: If you can take multiple reactions in a turn, that would mean multiple abilities and spells all happening together in one turn that aren't meant to be stacked leading to possibly unforeseen game breaking moments.
7) If you streamline the game by removing Initiative but then require an Initiative roll anyway to determine AP, is that really speeding up play? I guess a little and I do hate how initiative interrupts the flow of combat but that said, do you roll initiative every single round in this hack to determine AP? If so, that would actually end up taking more time overall in a typical fight vs D&D rules for initiative once at the beginning.
8) if normal out of combat situations still use a D20 and stats as normal, there's a big disconnect between combat and out of combat resolution mechanics which could confuse people a lot.
9) Going back to the hitting and missing, it appears unlikely to ever miss which does speed up the gameplay and is offset by damage reduction but some may not enjoy the concept. The biggest issue being that a character who pulls out a dagger they are proficient in, will get no added bonus if I'm understanding correctly from the video and will also go from having a super low chance to miss with Greataxe for example to suddenly missing quite regularly with the d4 weapon. The character's actual skill once again fails to factor into the situation. A fighter trained in war shouldn't suddenly become less likely to hit due to changing their weapon.
Overall though, I think the basic ideas are cool. 3 point Pathfinder 2e type economy, more freedom on a turn to gain more movement or do more interesting things rather than confined to "this needs this specific action type to use." Also love the interpose and being able to choose when to absorb damage. I homebrewed the interpose ability pretty much identically in my own games a few years back, felt it adds much more teamwork and a sense of self-sacrifice to the game. Saving someone at a cost. I loved that and really like the implementation here.
I think this is a really cool idea though and if I ever have spare time I'll check out the free core rules for sure. That said, I feel it could almost be better off as it's own game but 5e sells and has the biggest fanbase so all the best with the module.
I have some what implemented these rules with some changes to make it feel more stable.
1. you add your modifiers to attack rolls and get to re roll if you miss if you have proficiency in that weapon.
2. Ac is the amount of damage you block as a reaction(you use one of your actions but you can block your ac worth of damage as many times as your dex modifier ) you take the excess damage if the total of the attack surpasses your AC but only if all the attacks from a attackers are blocked
3. Guard breaking, if you block an attack the attacker has a chance to break your guard with a opposing save of some kind of this works you can’t block again till your turn
4. Most monsters have a multi attack or do more damage
They seem a little complex but they have balanced the rules and at least for my table work fine
I don't think i will use theses rules, sound just like a totally new game to me. But your video kept me hooked for the entire duration and your editing is very very good. I'm subscribed and will wait for more videos. Your channel have everything to grow fast, congrats.
I love this. going to try and implement it myself. Onlly error with your example story, misty step is a leveled spell, meaning it should take 2 aciton points, but the wizard only had one (I assume cause he is in the dying condition).
Bonus action spells cost only 1 AP.
The way you modified the action economy is really similar to the DC20 system and the stacking crits is exactly like righteous fury from Dark Heresy which is my favorite RPG! I love how your rules are streamlined yet still more flexible than 5E and the video editing was excellent at delivering your ideas. Great job!
I also saw the DC20 inspiration!
This deserves a system of its own, the rest of DnD was designed for standard combat rules, so you'll eventually run into conflicts, such as having a bonus to initiative that no longer matters. Also, I think it's weird to have it where the more sides of your damage die, the less likely you are to miss, a better alternative would be to just roll to hit and then deal average damage.
The bonus to initiative means that you're more likely to have higher AP on your first turn. It is a little strange that it's harder to miss with a bigger weapon (We usually envision something like a warhammer (1d10) or a greataxe (1d12) to be easy to jump away from, but here they have some of the lowest chances to miss)
And keep in mind that the bigger weapons would also have a lower chance to crit, which might help balance things out somewhat
This is another system. It's a inferior version of pf2e with the action points
@@MSTNocteor is DC20, which handles action points better than PF2 imo
@@godminnette2 I've always been curious about PF2e, but the system has so many things i don't like.
Discovered DC20 two weeks ago and it indeed looks to be the best of both worlds, and more.
You'd be better off with a different RPG system. 5E's convoluted rules and power bloat leads to everyone tinkering with it. As a result players are learning a 5E hacked system over and over again everytime they play with a different DM. There are other RPGs that do not require as much work to make it workable so you only have to learn the new system once instead over and over again...
Sure, but I can't get my table to play anything other than 5E :P take what we can get, and remember rule 0
Seems like it could be fun to try, looking at the preview there was one issue I thought of. Since enemies with over 12 ac dont take your stat mod damage then it removes insentives for most martial players to ever increase their main stat and they would only ever choose full feats.
That seems like a win to me, a good excuse to explore feats cause you worry less about stats. And this comming from a primarily martial player XD
The problem in my opinion is having to choose between stat increase and feats each time. If I had to run a game, I'd treat feats like exp or loot and award them as a consequence of a character's actions in game, such as after a significant achievement, stage of their character arc, special training or consistent playstyle
That's not a problem, it's an impactful choice that isn't easy to make. That's a good thing.@@davidedevincentis5444
@@davidedevincentis5444 I do believe that is actually one way feats and such can be granted to a player. And there are still half-feats that award a stat increase and ability of some sort. For instance I would often take Heavy Armor feat as a wizard cause one way or another im frontlining!
Found this with 14 minutes left in the kickstarter. Very thankful lol this seems great
I like the initiative order. After that, it seems like a different game system than DnD. As mentioned before it seems more like Pathfinder 2e. That being said if it works for you and your group more power to you.
Great job with the editing. Also this seems very similar to pathfinder second edition.
That was my thought as well.
Without all the clumckyness
It's just Pathfinder 2e wearing 5e as a skin, honestly I do think this is such a sudden shift with balance and encounter design that changes a lot of the mechanical feel of 5e that honestly might be just better off playing PF2e for a more crunch game or some more rules-light or OSR adjacent game for more simple approach to things.
Btw I love your videos Bonewizard do keep them up! Can't wait for part 2 of the Monk
oh hi bonewizard!
It's similar to pf2e in the same way 5e has an economy. Yes, it's... *there*, but the inspiration stops at having vaguely heard of the subject matter. This has none of the things that makes pf2's three action system as engaging as it is
I love this. I want to run a game based on Bloodborne and I really want to get across that fast paced combat, and this works great for that I think, it also means that more combats can happen in one session
Yep, you can fit in a lot more encounters this way!
these rule sets are cool, and really fit
for a different game
I am sure this would work for many tables, but the speed of things isn't always as important, I find, especially with more strategic parties. But that does not mean that it never fits, and I hope other DMs can use these rules well
Nimble, I LOVE your video style!
I’m excited for the game, but I have to say, your videos (all of them) are just GENIUS.
Roll initiative just when the session starts, and during rests. That way, you will have a ready initiative list long before the combat starts.
sir, you are a genius! I'll try this for my games)
I'm OK with my 5e combat, but this is a great video, would love expand a system based on it. Always up for a new system. Instant subscription man, good stuff.
Ankheg are normally large monstrosities but you call it a medium armored monster, is this a change made by he nimble rules? Do monsters not get to reduce damage from their armor? If there is no rolling initiative how are the wizard, dwarf and kobold coming up with their initiative scores? Wouldn't all players use daggers since there is a 25% chance of stacking damage dice on a crit? It also seems unlikely that the ankheg would be on the verge of death and not use its acid spray attack to target multiple foes, is this just DM incompetence?
This is great. The explosive critical hit and no attack roll make sense.
Wait a second… you’re just trying to get us to play pathfinder!
Caught me! Except for the adventure modules that are still 5e, and the classes, subclasses, spells, items, monsters, other supplements... pretty much everything is still 5e, just streamlined. I don't know how to play Pathfinder, I've got the books, but was overwhelmed by the complexity and fiddlyness. Pathfinder is the opposite direction I'm taking ;)
Just know that you've reinvented Pathfinder 2nd edition sans to-hit rolls.
All of these ideas are fun, but at some point when you change *so much* of the game, it's literally just a different game.
Even little stuff like "didnt have to confirm with the DM". Confirming with the DM takes 5 seconds. 10 at most. At the end of the night, we might have saved whole *minutes*.
“With some minor changes”
Proceeds to completely disregard hit modifiers, armorer class, the traditional action style, and death saves and fundamentally alters and undermines 50 other mechanics such as the entire functionality of basically any magic armor or shields
This changes 5e so damn much it isn't even the same game anymore.
The entire math and balance is now wack, sure I guess it can work but I won't lie sounds like a pain to deal with on the DM side.
As someone who plays online and run games through discord Avrae and Owlbear, tracking HP and AC ain't a problem, it's more so players not knowing how to play and or not reading lol
@@Evendur6748 I completely agree simply rebalancing ac is a pain for the dm having to adjust at each new combat all of this together is a nightmare not to mention the 100 unintentional interactions what happens when someone pulls a vorpal sword you just gonna insta kill everyone?
@@Evendur6748 it also ruins any class with special bonus actions
Dig it! I was skeptical at first "that ain't D&D" but looking at it like another system, it looks fast and furious!
How does this affect the action economy problem of big solo monsters in 5e? Do you still need to give them legendary actions?
Do monsters not required the dodge action? From the video it seems like the bug had "medium armor" but the rogue ignored it with a crit; wouldn't the first attack from the dwarf interact with the bug's armor in any way?
Monsters are largely ran exactly same, any 5e compatible monster works. That said, legendary actions are basically Action Points. If you wanted a more challenging Legendary/Solo/Boss monsters fight, giving them an action after each PC works really well for differing party sizes & encounter balance. Check the free preview out: www.kickstarter.com/projects/nimblerpg/nimble-streamlining-your-5e-game?ref=bjz6a8 for the rules for monsters.
The dwarf's first attack at 2:48 he rolls a 6 and deals that much damage (he doesn't add his STR modifier since the Ankheg's medium armor ignores a player's stat mod). Elegantly simulating reduced damage from a higher AC, but also speeding up play and reducing the mathematical load.
Long time DM here: Run big solo monsters EXACTLY like several smaller monsters rolled into one guy.
Give them multiple attacks and move options, just stagger them through the round. You can even roll multiple initiatives.
You can (and probably should most of the time) have the BOSS lose those actions at various HP breakpoints. Narratively you just say the big guy is starting to tire, and can't sustain the speed he had at first.
@@chawk1637 Thanks for the tips, I'm on the action oriented monsters ship since a while back. My question was to gage wether or not this hack fixes the core issues like PF2e, given that it touches on action economy, but apparently it doesn't.
I really love the fact that you made weapons dmg dice less of a stat stick
"Oh, yeah. I play League of Legends. I have a mod that makes it a janky cooking sim game."
Wow your ruels almost sounds like the 3 actions in pathfinder 2e.
Yep! PF2 was based off an older version of D&D. 5e already has 3 actions per round (move, action bonus action), they're just inflexible.
would be interesting to see what you actually kept from 5e. the system seems great but it's not d20
Kept the adventure modules, the monsters, the classes & sub classes, spells, weapons items, feats, abilities... pretty much everything, just trimmed the fat a bit :D
Lol, you went and trimmed the d20 from the d20 game. No offense, but it kinda reminds me of d6 systems like blades in the dark and dungeon world with the speed of the actions. I am curious as to what else was really changed outside of combat@@nimbleCo On a separate note, I also think this nimble system could work greatly with games like blades in the dark to make combat a bit more structured. Love the premise.
Still uses the d20 for all skill checks, saving throws, initiative, and other things. Just not for attack rolls :)
@@redviego6714 Fully agreed. I get not wanting to use certain things, but at some point you should just use another system. Nimble's a pretty cool idea, but it definitely would have worked better (imo, obviously) with a game like Blades.
First of all, this is PF2e without initiative(And some other modifications).
Second of all, if you gotta change this much to enjoy DnD with your friends, then it's time for you and your friends to pick up a different game.
Trust me, I spent an insane amount of time modifying DnD to my liking before realizing I could just find a different game that better suits my DMing style and needs.
I may not love everything here, but i do love Stabs.
I enjoyed that. Thanks for posting.
I love how this system gives the players more ways to react
This is Genius. Also, I need more of Stabs in my life, I must know more about him.
Honestly, it's an interesting idea for how to handle damage/attack rolls for a fresh system. As a lot of others have said though, this deviates so much from DND that I wouldn't really consider it DND at this point--which, also as others have said, I wouldn't really consider a bad thing. Though, for 5e, it winds up negating or having weird interactions with a lot of features that it might feel bad if you have a player who planned to use those kind of abilities.
I've been observing and trying systems like the MCDM RPG, Lancer, ICON, etc. and seeing how they handle and resolve skills, rolls, and damage, and how it differs from D20 based systems (if at all), so this is definitely going into the inspiration toolbox for when I one day decide to try and craft a system myself.
This is suspiciously similar to DC20 systems.
It's nearly identical, but the damage dice are different.
Dungeon Coach's DC 20 is definitely listed as one of the many inspirations on the opening page. DC20 looks like it's going to be a cool system, but it strays far enough away from 5e that all my adventures and classes and monster books etc. won't work. He's got some great ideas, but a bit fiddly from what I've seen so far.
@@nimbleCoit's pretty much DC20 for 5e. The only real difference is damage dice, which is pretty cool, but also the only way to DC20 could work with 5e health pools (damage has to be a lot higher).
As I kept watching it kept getting more and more similar. Interesting indeed...
@@eddieblanton2981 There would be one of 2 ways to convert DC20 to 5e, add damage dice (like they did) or increase the base damage and the Heavy damage.
Players experience lvl has a hugh part on how fast combat goes! Plus to all DM's ac, ability check or spell dc dont have to be a big secret helps speed up things while sticking with the rules!
LOVE IT, just pathfinder lol but I still love it a lot
I'd love to take inspiration from this system for a simple OSR system I'm writing.
Would you allow me to do so?
Sure! I'm actually looking for someone with more experience with OSR than I have to help make a OSR compatible version. send me an email if you'd like to chat
@@nimbleCoWell, I'd love to talk about this! Given I'd be able to design a whole system around this set of mechanics, there would be ways to make it even more streamlined!
Also, to what email can I write?
Yes! So much yes!
I was working on a similar system.
Hit points is described as fatigue and such. So why wouldn't you be depleted HP each round of combat.
At the end of a combat you would heal your total HD pool, minus the number of combat rounds.
This is what I do. If a player starts their action within 30 seconds of their turn starting, they get to add 1d4 to either their attack roll or damage. If their attack roll is over 5 the monsters AC, they get to add 1d4. If their action is unique and not the same as the previous (unless its a regular attack, they need to describe it in a cool different way) they get to use another d4 on their attack. So, if they go fast, do a unique attack, and hit over 5 of the monsters AC, they can add 3 d4's to their attack.
It’s wild how many people can hear a thing, think they understand it completely, then trash that thing. All without ever having tried it!
Hats off to the creators!
😅
For the first time ever i'm considering dming in person.
I feel like people overlook the physical ways in which you can reduce the time it takes at the table.
Everyone is rolling initiative and it's at the same time. A DM can pre-roll initiatives for encounters they know will happen. So the process is not that slow.
D&D's fundamental math has certain results. You don't need to add your modifiers to your attack if you rolled a 2. Or an 18. You can very quickly guess the AC.
While you're "waiting for permission", you can just roll damage while the DM checks if it hit.
I wrote a short program to calculate how much damage is added to the d4 by the exploding crits.
It's less that 1 dpr.
So I had an idea because the realized the issues that some people brought up - that monsters going at the end means a steamroll (either the players killing them all, or the enemies swarming all at once and TPKing) and that it makes seating arrangements matter which is kinda dumb.
So, what about doing Popcorn Initiative? Whoever's ready goes first still but instead of going clockwise they can choose whoever's turn goes next - including the enemies. It adds another strategic layer because, sure, you would rather not want to be stabbed by the enemy but you also don't want them all to go at the end and swarm you.
This is way cool. I've switched over to Shadowdark (haven't started yet, but in planning), but I'm wondering if it will have the same issues and I can adapt this.
I love this. Gonna try it out
Love this hack hopefully, I'll be able to back the Kickstarter in a day or two found this a little late in the game but it looks great
im stealing these
This gave me some good tips. as the campaign I DM climbs higher in levels, some of these tips will help me improve gameplay. My players are too eager with the higher level massive attacks and damage to want to change combat, but the exhaustion could help out as I crank up the baddies.
An easy way to fix many of these problem is to just roll for initiative in advance for monster and setting up the initiative order.
For spells, if someone is looking during others turn what his spells do, i find it pretty fast. Still, at our table we like the traditional system, even if this looks pretty fun
Great video! I agree with most of the things here, and have used a variant of it for a while. Speeding up the pacing of combat is great, i thought i would just throw a few tweeks ive found from ridiculous things my players have done:
A. Action economy for the enemies is important. Looks like the monster has arround 3 actions here which works, but smaller hords like Goblins and Gnolls get tedious like this. Try giving them one action each.
B. That one spell: Haste. Breaks so much stuff.
C. Pets like familers and Warlocks Pact of the Chain need 1 action, or the pet has to use the characters actions.
And finally D. Never let them use AP for Bonus actions. It might make sense, but it allows for allot of setup from buff spells and the ability to spam Healing Word.
There are more than this, but these are the main things to consider. I hope you do a follow-up on this!
What does the "extra attack" feature do in this system?
Two attacks with one action point? Or simply that your multiple attack penalty is negated for one additional attack?
Correct! after your first attack, you get an extra one for 0AP.
I play online,so the automated character sheets and automated initiative solve this issue instantly
This man is C O O K I N G
this is very interesting as i just finished learning about DC20 which takes the opposite direction, getting rid of the damage dice. instead, every 5th point above success gives an extra point of damage. which is nicely streamlined, but im not ready to say goodbye to six other dice of different sizes, your proposition i actually like more
I could also incorperate a buffing attacks idea i had recently, using small spells like cantrips to fuel another spell or an attack with additional power. For example, a spellcaster using fireball and then adding the gust cantrip in order to literally add fuel for the fire, thereby buffing the attack with possibly an additional attack die. Or a spellcaster using a 1 action point reaction with ray of frost to give the barbarian a cold damage variant of his greataxe swing to avoid slashing resistance.
The editing and pacing on this is beautiful. Love the ideas too, keep up the awesome work!
Very interesting. I like it. Good luck to you.
Nice video, I think a good solution for dnd 5e combat system would be players that remain focus on the game, that remembers when their turn is and that knows rules and what their characters can do (yeah, even the spells).
This, definitely. It is ridiculous what this guys players seem to not know.
But still. I think that dnd is now t supposed to be about remembering a lot of stats and rules and stuff like that. It’s about the cool combat moments and character interactions. This is a game not a job. And this system does add a some interesting simple strategy that some 5e combat lacks. And some players aren’t capable or don’t want to remember 8 different numbers at all time.
You need to be playing a PbtA game if D&D combat feels this bad for you.
Im deffinetly gonna incorporate atleast some of these changes in my own game.
Is this just some sort of a pathfinder?
I'm intrigued.
Well.... I'm sold!
Gonna try it this saturday with some friends, if it's as good as it looks it can fix my table's biggest problem, COMBAT, thanks!
The best combat i had was in COS. We were fighting an evil tree and i combined giant's might with enlarge to match its size, and the party's vampire bloodhunter learned its weakness. So, I pucked her up and as a proxy, i helped remove that weakness.
It was a contest between my +3 str with advantage against that tree's +4 con with advantage.
You mentioned how as a reaction you can reduce damage by AC - 8
With that in mind, to reduce the math done on the spot, could a player just reduce their AC by 8 on their character sheet? Is the original AC needed for anything with these alternate rules?
Thank-you for your time.
Yep, there is an updated character sheet to make that easier. Original AC isn't used for much at all, just like the big Attribute Score numbers, only the modifier is used.
am still a bit confused on how AC blocks dmg in your version , can someone explain pls?
You're applying many modern design methods like 1 roll resolution, exploding dice and X action system
Which is really cool, but I wonder if there was not a space for Nimble as a standalone system
Turns out there was, and he built a different game and raised a quarter million dollars to publish it on backerkit 🎊🎉 it’s still open for late pledges on the website if you’re interested
I appreciate people's homebrew. D&D was originally meant to be modified.
the ultimate D&D 5e combat hack, is an entirely different system? because thats what it sounds like.
must admit it sounds pretty cool though
Looked into this with a friend. We noticed that it really nerfs casters. With their low AC they would have a hard time negating any damage, and they would have less AP than melee classes since it would cost them 2 AP to cast a non cantrip spell, while melee attacks or abilities only take 1 AP. And with the AP cost like that, a melee class with the Dying condition would still be a threat, while a caster class with the Dying condition would be stuck to cantrips.
I think there's some good ideas here, but it still very much needs some work. But if it's for a melee campaign, then it would be good.
Interesting idea, but this just becomes a simplified Pathfinder basically. I like the crunch but I will take that crit mechanic as I do not like giving basic +1,2, 3 weapons which kesds me to making homebrew.
Ultimately I prefer having little combat though so some heaviness is good.
3:02 How to speak with that awesome badass voice?
I've been using this system with my players and they've been absolutely loving it. One thing I haven't been able to find much of in these comments is questions about specific feats and things of the such that might conflict with this system.
How would something like great weapon fighting work? How about the Sharpshooter feat?
My solutions have just been adjusting them slightly on a whim to fit the system, and there's probably more im not aware of.
the full PDF has a section on feats & abilities and our discord chat has a list of FAQs for free as well!
Great video! I’ll definitely try this with my group!
Question: Is there a good way to make armor class a passive thing? I don’t know how I feel about making it an action.
Yes! check out the free core rules PDF, it details some extra bits the video didn't.
The only real problem I have with this is the system relies on players not being prepared. As a wizard main myself, if I'm going first it's fairly easy to determine what spell I'd want to use (a control spell, like command at low levels and wall of force at high levels). The idea of rolling initiative is to try to prevent creatures that don't have dex or a specific ability (at the cost of another ability, such as the alert feat) to offset a lower dex in initiative. This system rewards attentiveness, which is honestly amazing and would help keep tables on track, but if players are paying attention then it becomes interruptive as everyone tries to get the first action in or players could set up in advance who goes first, completely bypassing the reason initiative exists, and throw a group combo.
A rule I've seen before that accomplishes much of what this video tries to solve is simply rolling initiative either one time at the beginning of the session or if you're looking to start combats faster without interruption initiative can be rolled at the end of the encounter in preparation for the next. If it's the length of each turn that is causing issue a timer/stopwatch works fabulously.
Dnd (at least 5e) doesn't go kindly with the action point based system because (as said in the video a cantrip is one action point) casting three cantrips is going to be way more damage than any other spell. If a caster is limited in the number of cantrips what about a combo of a bonus action spell, a cantrip, and attacking. If that's the system you want to play Pathfinder is already set up for this and the two systems are very similar.
how does Book cast Misty Step which is a 2nd level spell with only 1 AP?
Bonus action & reaction spells cost 1AP (ie: they're faster to cast than a full action spell).
@@nimbleCo Ah! Thanks for the clarification! I've backed and am looking forward to see the whole rule set.
@@captaindudeman3613 Which means you can cast two leveled spells in one turn. 5th level healing word + grande attack spell here we come. Or a warlock could cast three eldritch blasts in one turn (I assume). Not borked at all.
This is interesting, but I cant help but feel it makes ranged weapons even stronger then they are in base 5e
As someone who’s played in a system similar to this, it’s broken. It sounds ideal but it doesn’t work like that in practice.
What doesn’t work about it?
@@AlexPBentonMostly everything, there’s no way to properly balance it players get frustrated, and in this case a lot of class features don’t work, like how does dread ambusher function, how do most spells work now?
It’s a different system trying to be dnd, it just isn’t fun
Turns out it worked so we he built an entire stand alone game and raised a quarter million dollars to publish it on backerkit 🎊🎉 it’s still open for late pledges on the website if you’re interested
Ive been playing with this, its really fun. I used to be in a game where i could go have a cigarette break after hitting sneak attack wirh my rogue and come back and still not be my turn
So what about a fighter who's already in range of the enemy and has two extra attacks? 9 attacks a round?
I think this might be a good way to introduce the game to new players or something like that however 1.) having players all go at the start punished them because multiple enemies in a row having turns allows them to do a lot more before player reaction 2.) quieter players will always be last in combat 3.) the AP system and quickened hit rolls would majorly favor some classes over others.
Again cool way to play a more loosely goosey game but it would be really imbalanced and most likely leave some players feeling like background decoration for their main character party member that does everything
Surprisingly, the math works out beautifully. It's up to the DM and other players to make sure no one is left out.
Dragonbane and Pathfinder coming together pretty much? It does seem quite interesting
Good Stuff! Electric Bastionland and its related RPG Into the Odd roll damage straight up as well. You should check those systems out. Very well known in the indie rpg scene.
But how do the AC exactly work in this? Cause im still confused with that
So how do bonus actions work? Like how would a barbarian rage?
Heyyyyy you read the Pathfinder rules