I am not convinced. I feel like removing damage dice, while it saves time, removes taste and make every weapon just à skin, and every damage spell identical, sure you can add an effect with the damage but I feel that it will still reduce the number of spells and make spellcasters taste the same.
I don't think so. I feel like the damage is not what makes a spell or a weapon unique in my opinion. While there are many different dice that could be used for damage, there are only 2 variables that are important to consider: average damage and spread (with that I mean that 1d12 has a higher spread than 2d6 but amost the same average damage). In DC20, different spells and weapons will still havevdifferent average damage, just not that much different because of the math being tighter. They will all have the same spread though, but honestly that's not something I'd miss. In short: If damage dice is the only thing aking your spells different frome one another, they are already almost the same spells.
There are better ways to make weapons feel unique. In DC20 each weapon type has a unique maneuver that you can do with it to add damage or conditions in a unique way (for example making opponents bleed). Removing dice removes useless complexity and time wasting to make way for actually interesting mechanics.
@@insertphrasehere15 I tend to agree. Different damage dice offer visual-haptic feedback for different weapons, but a unique maneuver, effect or whatever you want to call it offers actual tactical choices that I believe are much more interesting in the long run.
I agree, that is the only feature that is getting me on the fence about this system. The video didn't helped either, since he made a strawman out of the rolling dice... that scenario he made does not represent what actually happens whem we roll dies on my table.
@@hanarielgodlike9283 The amount of time spent adding up dice does... well... add up. There's not much difference between using average damage and using your d20 roll to add a bit of random range. At high level it's worse, with LOTS of damage dice that take longer to add up, but yet statistically the more dice you roll the more likely you are to roll very close to average. It's pointless.
I think one of the biggest benefits of this system is that it is cleaner for monster and player attack blocks. You just say it does 2 damage rather than 1d4 + X. Also it makes balancing easier, since you are a bit forced to go higher in numbers when it comes to rolling higher die types or higher number of die. There is less room for slight boosts.
@@UndecidedCryptid Oh I just meant the reduction of the amount of text in Stat Blocks themselves. As is, WOTC lists the damage die + a number, then also has the average in brackets. It makes sense that they do because it’s a part of the games culture, but that’s a good way to streamline the game for something new that isn’t coming with the same expectations.
I love this. The more i get into damage calculations in 5e, the more i realize how pointless the damage dice are compared to adding flat damage on your strikes and i defiantly agree that rolling damage takes up time better spent on moving to the next player or describing your attacks. I really want to try out this system and get more excited with every video.
I must admit this feature alone has me mega impressed for a system of rolling using a d20. I haven't seen innovation on this scale since blades in the dark d6 scaling skills. Very hyped for content about this system
I was skeptical at first too but the more I've watched and the more I've learned about the system it makes so much sense. It's streamlined and smooth. I know people are complaining about you're not doing big numbers but everything's just scaled down. So say for instance you do 25 damage against an enemy that has 40 health. DC 20 that would be like doing 6 damages against something that has 10 health. The ratios are still the same and the big hits there it's just not as big numbers. I am so excited for the system in the potential that it has that it has. Combat looks so much fun 💜. Also Coach that character sheet looks so awesome. 🤩
I've been enjoying the DC20 content and there is something special about someone being so enthusiastic about their work. I really like the dynamic system. When I first saw the stream the damage system was announced I was a bit apprehensive, but since then it has really grown on me and has made me more excited. Everything about the system sounds like a well oiled machine, yet one filled with passion and brimming with creativity. I think there will be a bit of an odd taste too the high numbers being lower than they would be in any other TTRPG, but I think players would adjust what "BIG" numbers are when playing the game. I also think my table has the advantage of being online where there is that disconnect between the group and the math, as no one else in the group just has silence instead of getting to see the numbers add up. I usually would not cite a digital group as a pro, but I think that disconnect will create a greater ease to adapting to the loss of the tension building math. Keep up the good work and I am looking forward to the game when its whole has come to fruition.
My one real concern is that people like bigger numbers. I get the mathematical advantages, and I’m thrilled with the streamlining effect of damage automatically flowing from the attack roll. I’m only concerned that players (especially current 5e/PF2e players) will be disappointed with “low” damage. Which doesn’t mean I won’t be trying to convince my group to try DC20.
"bigger numbers" is a relative thing. For example, in Final Fantasy, a "big number" is 9999 damage. But doing 9999 damage in a single attack in D&D is unheard of. DC20 will have "big numbers" as well. They won't be 9999, but we're not playing Final Fantasy. It's also not 5e.
@@AJBernard this is a good point. If a 2 is normal damage, and a Critical Hit is 6 damage, then rolling a natural 20 is a big moment because you deal triple damage. The Players still feel like their getting big numbers, there just not rolling several dice to get there.
My reasoning supporting the original comment. Logically yes the fears are unfounded. But who ever said humans are logical beings. (Monkey brain go brrr!!!)
@Eddie Blanton and a critical will almost always deal more where in 5e you can crit and rolll all 1s and deal less then a regular attack (which is why I always do max dmg+a roll for crits)
Pros: streamlined (no unnecessary distractions like rolling additional unnecessary dice after already hiting, less math and lost time on thing nobody cares about), always great base damage, roleplay provoking options Cons: people like hitting hard so you might need to implement a variant rule to multiply all damage and health by 10 to 1000 (we humans got monkey brain). Amazing system by me DC. Looking forward to more of it. Take care 😇❤️
Also some of us like to hog all the spotlight and if they could they would roll for an eternity, so please, forget about those fools and concentrate your energy on useful stuff (this is not useful this is commonly known fact).
Not necessarily. If you use some type of platform like roll20, normally the damage rolls are included with the attack roll, you literally do not lose any type of time.
Making the game like Yu-Gi-Oh isn't going to fix anything, and not to mention, the numbers are going to be factors of 10 or 100, or there's going to be decimal points in the small numbers system.
I have been using a hard rule that rolls 25 and above inflict a status effect (depending on the damage type) this status effect is also applied to nat 20s, its simple to remember and gets the martials doing alot of utility stuff beyond just damage. it also makes things like bless and the help action really strong.
I thinking I might include something similar for high attack rolls and crits But I think the extra damage might scale with their proficiency bonus. Add proficiency to damage per 5 increment above AC A low level character exceeds by 10 = 4 extra damage due to 2x2 Higher level character exceeds by 10 = 8 extra damage due to 4x2
Love the way this sounds! I’m currently working on a project MEANT to become a video game, but while I build the world and what not im making it as a TTRPG and Id LOVE to implement this system into it
I'm not sure how tedious everyone thinks gathering, rolling and adding numbers are but that's usually not what bogs down combat on my tables. It's usually people getting distracted and checking their phones. I personally love lending another player my dice to roll a lot of damage because it makes me feel like some of that damage is thanks to me. Obviously not literally but it makes me feel involved and just increases the fun. And I personally think the joy of rolling a lot of dice outweighs the convenience of this system.
True, a lot of the problem is phones, but most of the time the reason people get on their phones is because they’re just sitting there waiting for their turn. If you take away those wait times and make it so that everyone at the table is actually engaging in what’s happening, then that becomes much less of a problem. So without the math and everything the game can become a lot more engaging and fun for everyone. I do agree though getting to roll a ton of dice is a lot of fun. I just feel like getting to have a good time with friends, fighting a monster with have fast-paced combat, is a lot better. I dunno though that might just be me.
Its a massive time saver, and being able to take actions off your turn with multiple reactions means people *can’t* be on their phones if they want to effectively contribute.
This kind of reminds me of World of Darkness. In there you have dice pools, you roll your pool to hit and you need X successes to hit. Every success above that deals 1 extra damage and you deal your weapon damage as well.
How would you differentiate between a weapon that is accurate and weak, vs a weapon that is clumsy but does a lot of damage, with this system? By merging everything into a single roll you potentially lose that granularity. Simplifying has the side effect of reducing the nuances associated which can also feel bad for the people who enjoy their characters feeling unique and distinct.
Ultimately I am 100% fine losing that granularity. i do not think the nuance of that type of weapon would make a character feel less unique, there are SO many things to make them unique, I think that will be taken care of. I love the feedback and will look out for that for sure. You could have a weapon not deal heavy and brutal hits if you wanted to focus on its accuracy and you could have a weapon ONLY deal damge on a heavy and brutal hit... so you still could accomplish what you wanted if needed :)
Would be cool when you get a nat 20 that the different weapon types have different effects instead of letting that be up to the player. axes create bleed, swords cuts through enemies and hits others, maces pushes enemies away and daggers create advantage on the next attack
Or maybe the mix of the two? A few options depending on the weapon, and the player can choose from these each time they crit? I like your idea so much, it would make a real difference between weapons, not just the different damage. But I also like the idea of the players being able to choose how they want to deliver that critical hit, and having more (mechanically) different options.
Hey! Just a quick suggestion. You might want to checkout Spheres of Power for 5e. It's an alternative magic system that might give you ideas for your RPG. Personally I'm just hoping you do something like that bc I hate traditional DND spellcasting. Awesome video btw!
unpopular opinion here, ive been watching a bunch of your dc20 videos and you have so many complex features with complex mechanics that is going to be a nightmare to remember everything for the player
I like the idea of adding something more to massive hits to low AC opponents. I'll have to create some sort of house rule that adds more punch to an attack based on how much you go past its AC. 🤔
As someone who is also making an rpg (though mostly for personal use) I love this system, I think certain features should still call for rolled damage, perhaps as a way to make spell damage more risky to pull off or something of the sort. Adding more gambling is something I find to be a little exciting.
I made a similar system that tried to simulate "force = mass x acceleration" and skill. Weight of the weapon x (str/2), +1 per pt exceeding to-hit roll. If you exceed to-hit by 5, the target gets a "minor" status effect based on damage type. If you exceed by 10, it's a "major" status effect. If you crit and exceed 5, the minor status effect is upgraded to a major one. If you crit and exceed by 10, it's a death save. Armor didn't just help your AC, but it also reduced damage taken, and the effective amount you've exceeded the attack by, for the purposes of the added system.
Oh. Going after physics would be cool. Keep in mind that multiplication is more difficult to do by hand than addition. Maybe adding weapon weight plus strength is more accessible. Video games can get away with having more complex formulas. The computer does the calculations while running the game. I recently learned that Pokemon has a crazy complicated formula for damage. It is surprising since the game franchise is so kid friendly. If you can think of cool formulas, good for you. I am just saying to keep accessebility in mind. You may be better off using the fancier formulas for designing video games.
Just a question. So in your system you reveal the armorclass of a monster? Or do you do this secretly? Or do you just tell the amount of extra damage you get so they guess a little where the AC is? Or do you use something else?
I can't tell what he plans or thinks to be the best, but for my tableI think I would only tell my players what type of hit they've got (normal, hard, or brutal). Yes, after a few turns of combat they could guess the armor class, but the fight will probably not last that long anyway, and they can also find it out if I only tell them whether they hit or not. Of course people who focus more on those numbers can find it out earlier but with my group we are lucky to not have any metagamers, so for my game I'm not concerned about that.
Rather than just saying “pathfinder 2e”… for those that don’t know, exceeding the needed to hit by 10 is a crit. And weapons have features/traits. I have a few concerns with what you just said about DC20 system: 1) redoing all monsters to have lower HP seems like a big job and doesn’t let you pick something up easily in the d20 ecosystem, 2) regular hits where the player only beats the AC by one are not going to ever do much damage, and a high AC and some damage resistance makes one invulnerable.
He already customizes most, if not all, of his monsters from other games as a DM. So everything he builds should fit his system style. That’s my guess.
TORG has a very similar system where weapons have a base value then you increase depending on how well you roll. I even did this in a home brew game of mine and it works great. In my experience most D&D players will miss it. Those that play multiple systems will not. Those that just play your game and have never played any other....will not know any better.
I’ve been trying to work with a similar idea, that the relative success of the attack determines the damage. I love this idea in a D20 system just like I do in my D6 stuff.
What's this, a former math teacher telling me to do less math? Can I skip leg day while I'm at it, Coach? Side note, have you had a chance to see the D&D movie? I know it's hard to get to the theater as a new dad, but I'd love to hear your review if you get the chance!
I think something that might be cool for people that cant give up the randomness of rolling for damage (kinda me) maybe enchanting or improving your weapons or magical effects on the weapons could be a roll. Or maybe a class feature could be a roll. "Roll you smite die to see how your gold favours your hit" maybe its just one or two classes that work with damage die. Oooorrr maybe that would be too confusing and i need to let it go
As long as this doesn't wash away the paltry amount of customisation that comes from picking weapons in dnd currently, then I can see this working. Probably the change that excites me the least so far, although that'd not necessarily to say it's bad. I don't think you managed to convince me that damage dice rolling is bad, so we're starting from different positions there. I definitely think there's something to be said for rewarding big hits above AC, but in my own design I'd probably customise that for different types of weaponry - big hits deal massive dmg from heavy weapons, whereas finesse weapons provide flatter damage, with a bonus for *just* beating the AC
I hope the new DC20 book has various rules to implement different parts of the system into 5e, so DMs can slowly integrate existing players or cherry-pick their favorite concepts. For example, what if we like everyone but we want 5e damage dice + HP? Having those options will certainly draw in a larger group of new players.
I like this idea a lot. It is important to make some of your mechanics different than 5e. We already have 5e and too many designers make a 90% copy. Why play a game like that? I am interested in NEW ideas and yours have been very good.
I personally love rolling for damage, but add damage for better results looks amazing, i love pf2e system of crits and i might add your system to my 5e games
I like this system. Too much have I been the one in the group to roll the worst numbers to then finally roll something good... to then roll for damage and get the lowest number. This system takes that away and, instead, increase the damage the better the hit roll is. This mechanic is actually pretty cool! I'm going to definitely implement this hit die system for my campaign.
So, I & a few of my friends would be fine with either because math is our thing. (engineer & math teacher) Others not so much because they are not great at math & exhausted from heavy work. I'm not certain how your play is less math intensive you have to know the "Roll minus AC divided by 5" if I understood correctly, which sounds a bit more like math than a separate roll adding a flat modifier. Additionally, it has been said at least since D&D 3.0 that the real damage comes from the modifier & not the dice roll. You may save up-front math versus at the table math, but it seems for those who struggle to be equally cumbersome.
I agree with you but I think that's why he puts the different ACs for heavy hit and brutal hit right on the character sheet. And I imagine he would put them right on the monster stats. That way you know the exact AC you need to hit for those categories without having to calculate each time whether you beat them by 5, 10 etc.
I asked my group, we all like rolling dice and wouldn't want to lose damage dice completely as it's part of playing the game. However we did concede that too many dice can be annoying, so we would like to see less "8d8+2" and more "2d8+20"
I still think its fun to roll for damage i took a while yo think. But i think theres something lost not rolling. Because some of the most fun our table had is seeing just how epic a hit it was or how epic an fail it was. The streamline feels like a great computer gane but less tabletopy
Most of your issues with Rolling for Damage is not a problem in a VTT, where Damage can be rolled automatically at the same time as the hit roll. Not saying those issues aren't an issue, but that a good amount of the players might not experience those issues as commonly as you thought. The only point which really sticks is the disappointing damage rolls, which I absolutely agree with.
Here's another thing: those times when you roll 'all the dice' on a big spell or a big crit... The more dice you roll the more that you statistically are likely to be closer to the average, making rolling those dice even more pointless the more of them there are.
If you can see how lame it is to roll well for a hit and then to roll low damage, I hope you see now why rolling for hit points when gaining a level is a terrible idea! If it's "not fun" to roll a 1 for damage after a high roll to hit, why would it be fun to roll a 1 for new hit points after possibly weeks of playing?
I think it would be fun for role-playing purposes to still have silver copper etc. but yeah for just purely keeping track it should always be in goold to keep it simple
@@detectiveMM The majority of coins in the Middle Ages were silver coins like the penny, farthing, groat, etc. Only the nobility would have access to gold coins. Copper coins were almost non-existent.
@@detectiveMM What you say is very true. In my own personal experience with RPGs for the last 40+ years, I feel that Medieval culture, its limited technology, and its general way of life was very interesting, and makes for a much richer roleplaying experience when history is followed a little closer and not all over the place like D&D.
(Edited after playtesting ) This idea incorporates the glancing blow video... Take a weapon that does 8 average damage with modifiers. Use this average as base damage. Here is how it works... If an attack equals the AC and HPs are above 50% of max HP, base damage -3, if the HPs are below 50% of max HP, base damage +3 to simulate bloodied condition. Then for attacks up to AC +3, base damage -2 (Glancing hit). Then for attacks above AC +3, base damage (Hit). Then for attacks above AC +7, base damage +2 (Heavy hit). Then for attacks above AC +11, base damage +4 (Brutal hit)... The average damage for all potential attacks is just a little over average damage including a critical hit. The math works out perfectly!!! ... The result of the dice gives more levels of fun.
I'm curious as to how much HP characters and monsters get per level for DC20. This damage system is similar to how I did damage for DtwenD (a system that currently exists mainly in my Development Vlog). The difference is that in DtwenD, the damage you deal is the amount by which you beat your opponent's defense (i.e. beat it by 8, deal 8 damage). Strength/Dexterity is already incorporated into the attack roll, so there's no need to add it again to damage. As for armor and shields, they act as separate hit point pools that the player can choose to use in place of their own hit points (or Grit, in DtwenD terms).
Oh wow. I think one of the major weaknesses of DND is that it is too dependednt on luck and randomness. Having one dice roll per turn is an improvement. It reduces the amount of randomness in the game. It also has the benifot of speeding up the game. This DC20 eliminates the damage roll and merges things to an attack roll. I did make my own house rule for DND. Players roll only the danage roll for thier turn. Then they add bonuses on top of that. There is adding the proficiency bonus. There is also adding the ability score based on what the attack is. Anything except constitution can apply. Defense works differently. Creatures have a bonus based on thier armor instead of and armor class. I take armor class and subtract ten to get and armor bonus. The damage roll of an attack is subtracted by the armor bonus of the opponent. There is damage absorbdion for armor. I think this is more realistic and fun. Missing attacks agianst high armor opponents sucks. I would rather have high armor opponents substract more damage. There are spells that deal damage abd require a saving throw. Even fireball is like this. I have a houserule that these attacks are calculated the same way as regular damage rolls, except that they are subtracted by the ability score instead of the armor bonus. The ability score matches the one for the kind of save. If I was making my own new game entirely, I wouldn't have dice rolls. I would just have every hit have the same base damage and have perfect accuracy. That is nice. It would also be really fast to figure out. The base damage can still be modified with bonuses. It just won't be random.
DC, is there any way you could offer the same type of alternative for save or suck spells? I think this concept could make those much more entertaining to play and exciting for the players and DM’s running the opposing characters. Now your rolls would have extra meaning and how bad you fail would really affect something. Not to mention, now every stat has extra meaning because dumping a stat can literally be life or death versus an inconvenience. Great work as always. Not sure I’m on board, but I’m always glad to try one of your suggestions.
As a patron who's seen some live-streams, I don't want to steal Coach's thunder, so I won't say too much, but due to the mana system every spell will do something, regardless of rolls. Everything is also roll to hit... plus more
@@damianspence, thank you for that note. I’ve been in and out of the game design process. But rolling for everything makes sense by Coach’s philosophy. Thank you for letting me know. It was the first live stream I’ve caught in quite awhile. Very enjoyable.
As a player, I want to roll the damage dice. As a DM, I don't let the players know the AC of the target. I feel a lot of this system is simply making things more complex and will slow things down.
I am not sold on static damage for a weapon. I do also like what your saying in rolling a 27 is the exact same as a 15 but instead of using static damage still use specific damage die for weapons and every 5 you beat the AC by adds a simple +1 to the damage. So a d8 + 1 , d8 + 2 etc. This still keeps a damage die and gives you the feel of making a mighty strike without scoring a crit. Just my 2 cents.
Tbh weapons having a static damage value is a good idea but I feel it should be based off the average roll of the die type then adding pluses if you get high enough. But how does this mix with your AC/EC system.
I do 2d12 and your damage mod is the difference between your roll and the target AC if you roll 20 on 10 Ac you get +10 damage making it so when you roll really good to hit, you see it do more damage
Interesting but does that mean any barbarian would hit has hard as a bard as long as they both succeed their attack roll? Don't weapons have different stats, then? I'd love to use that system though, but I'd love some clarification too :)
Seems to me to be a missed opportunity within a missed opportunity, streamlining-wise. Why not just have a hit do flat damage (a short sword does 2 hp for hitting an AC 15 with a dice roll of 15 (including modifiers), THEN add 1 hp of damage for every point over the target AC. Meaning, a total hit score of, say 19, does 2+4 more damage (the +4 derived from the four numbers higher than the target AC. This would then be value added for attacks and their corresponding modifiers (fighters with high strength would reap the benefits of that same strength statistically and you couldn’t eliminate the need for a second roll for damage altogether (with nat 20s still doing double damage, but based on the total modifiers included) So, in this example, a fighter with a 18 STR rolls a nat 20 on a 15 AC, therefore: +4 from STR, +2 proficiency bonus, short sword flat damage: 2… Total damage: 8 (from all modifiers listed above) x 2 = 16 total damage. This would address every concern you listed, streamline combat turns, AND make those higher rolls count. And we haven’t even discussed how this benefits rogues or magic items yet, or spell-casters magic attack “to hits”. Turning everything into a ratio is good, but does not take it far enough, imo. If your goal is to make these rolls have more impact while also quickening the combat turn.
Are the characters in DC20 3d6 right down the line chumps like in Dungeon Crawl Classics, Five Torches Deep, Shadowdark, Castles and Crusades, Old School Essentials, and OSRIC?
In D&D the damage roll indicates how well you hit, the attack roll just shows how stylishly you got past the target's defences! There are games that do it differently - that's just the rules of D&D. People commonly roll to hit and damage at the same time so I'm not sure how much time it'll save.
Am i understanding, ac=15, attack roll with greataxe=18, the damage is the difference between (3), plus a static weapon damage modifier using average for the die (6), dealing 9 damage and for every 5 above the ac i add 1 to it?
The biggest problem with that approach is that a lot of TTRPG players, if not most of the players, love to collect dice. Your own sponsor for this video is a dice company. Players want to roll their d4, d8... One of the biggest complains I hear is that the d12 doesn't get enough uses in D&D. Your system sounds very simple and very cool. Reminds me a bit of Vampire the Masquerade that only uses d10. And seems very beginner friendly like 3D&T, that only uses d6. But it won't please the dice goblins out there.
i think its true that the rolling of damage in dnd is not good how it is but i really like to rolle for damage because it cinnd off mmakes it more interisting to hit something because it can change that much everytime but i think this works way better for allot of people so thanks for the hard work behind all of this and i am thankfull that we are shifting away from the ,,dnd is perfekt and everyone should play it,, mentalaty and it is nice and refreshing to see new options pop up everywere thank you
I'm sorry, but that has been done better before. Honestly maybe if you hit harder you can get some sort of extra weapon perk like a trip or disarm, but even games with low hp like Fallout 2d20 uses dice. Even if their d6 damage system is odd with 1 and 2 being raw numbers, 3 and 4 being 0 damage, and 5 and 6 being 1 damage plus an effect, you still have fun rolling and adding up the numbers, even if it takes time.
The removal of damage dice is unfortunately the one thing preventing me from investing in DC 20. Yes it's a bit slower with physical dice (my group plays digitally, removing the math issue), but it adds an extra element of suspense. IS this hit going to finish a monster, or is it going to hang on and strike back? I am however planning to snag the idea of brutal hits in the form of 1 extra die added to the damage roll.
@@frostphoenix8256 so far I’ll say that from all the play testing, I’ve never felt any negative loss of suspense, and if a monster will die or not. Damage fluctuates so much due to the dice rolls, extra effects, class features, weapon, properties that you never the same damage twice. And it also has an added benefit of everyone at the table can see the damage add up to its final number and keeps engagement. I would rather have more engaged players that moves the game forward based on how high you roll and tactics, instead of dragging out the damage, potentially having terribly low roles and so on 100% respect your stance, but I would say to try it out, cause it’s the biggest thing that people have said they change their mind on after feeling it out Thank you for the feedback!
You could make your life far easier by simply using the difference between an attack-score (previously aka as "damage") of one (or several) opponents and a defense-score (previously aka "AC") as the amount of damage taken?! If several monsters attack and each has an attack-score of D6, three of them have an attack-score of 3d6. That will make monsters like goblins far more dangerous, as there is strength in numbers (unlike with D&D, where it does not matter at all, whether you fight one or eight goblins at the same time).
Fading sun's. The higher you roll, better success. Until you roll over your skill, then you fail Brilliant use of D20. Someone must convert that system to d&D
Unless your going to give different weapons other abilities all this will do is make every weapon feel the same, much more so than they already do. As a few people have said already, you could just use average damage instead of rolling for damage. If your really want to have beating the armor class by a lot do more damage you could just use your method of +1 damage per 5 above the AC and add it to the average damage.
And by that I mean the succeed by more than 5 to get additional effects. Although to be fair, the system is much closer to Savage Worlds. And don't take it as me disparaging your system. Pathfinder and Savage Worlds are great places to draw inspiration from. Both are really good systems.
Interesting system! My worry is this does create a bit more back and forth between players and DMs during each attack due to there being multiple ACs to take into account, similar to the multiple AC issues seen in 3.5e. Meanwhile a roll in 5e is often "Natural 19" or "Natural 2" etc, such that frequently a player or DM can skip the mental mathematics and at that point just focus on damage. Now, I don't disagree that rolling for damage can be a drag, so there's definitely a case to be made for set damage, but there's a balance to be found of time vs fun. I've often told my paladin in game "let me know when you know the damage, if you do the damage you got to do the math 😉" and moved on in the initiative. The impact of the crit is there whether or not the players know the result of the hit, and it gives them something to do off turn. I could see Heavy Hit and Brutal Hit being a useful mechanic to wrap into a feat, as this means that the complexity of multiple ACs is limited to particular PCs.
I am not convinced. I feel like removing damage dice, while it saves time, removes taste and make every weapon just à skin, and every damage spell identical, sure you can add an effect with the damage but I feel that it will still reduce the number of spells and make spellcasters taste the same.
I don't think so. I feel like the damage is not what makes a spell or a weapon unique in my opinion. While there are many different dice that could be used for damage, there are only 2 variables that are important to consider: average damage and spread (with that I mean that 1d12 has a higher spread than 2d6 but amost the same average damage).
In DC20, different spells and weapons will still havevdifferent average damage, just not that much different because of the math being tighter.
They will all have the same spread though, but honestly that's not something I'd miss.
In short: If damage dice is the only thing aking your spells different frome one another, they are already almost the same spells.
There are better ways to make weapons feel unique. In DC20 each weapon type has a unique maneuver that you can do with it to add damage or conditions in a unique way (for example making opponents bleed). Removing dice removes useless complexity and time wasting to make way for actually interesting mechanics.
@@insertphrasehere15 I tend to agree. Different damage dice offer visual-haptic feedback for different weapons, but a unique maneuver, effect or whatever you want to call it offers actual tactical choices that I believe are much more interesting in the long run.
I agree, that is the only feature that is getting me on the fence about this system. The video didn't helped either, since he made a strawman out of the rolling dice... that scenario he made does not represent what actually happens whem we roll dies on my table.
@@hanarielgodlike9283 The amount of time spent adding up dice does... well... add up.
There's not much difference between using average damage and using your d20 roll to add a bit of random range.
At high level it's worse, with LOTS of damage dice that take longer to add up, but yet statistically the more dice you roll the more likely you are to roll very close to average. It's pointless.
I think one of the biggest benefits of this system is that it is cleaner for monster and player attack blocks. You just say it does 2 damage rather than 1d4 + X. Also it makes balancing easier, since you are a bit forced to go higher in numbers when it comes to rolling higher die types or higher number of die. There is less room for slight boosts.
Monsters in dnd already have the option to do flat damage though right? Is that what you mean?
@@UndecidedCryptid Oh I just meant the reduction of the amount of text in Stat Blocks themselves. As is, WOTC lists the damage die + a number, then also has the average in brackets. It makes sense that they do because it’s a part of the games culture, but that’s a good way to streamline the game for something new that isn’t coming with the same expectations.
At my table I have my players roll their d20 and their damage dice at the same time, it has helped speed up combat tremendously
This is the way.
In my opinion, watching people do math is very exciting. Love the fresh ideas and the fluidity of the system so far!
I love this. The more i get into damage calculations in 5e, the more i realize how pointless the damage dice are compared to adding flat damage on your strikes and i defiantly agree that rolling damage takes up time better spent on moving to the next player or describing your attacks. I really want to try out this system and get more excited with every video.
Incredible. It's like you're now discovering ALL SYSTEMS that don't use damage dice (99% of them)
@@caurd and about 2% of people play those systems regularly.
@@brilobox2 No
I must admit this feature alone has me mega impressed for a system of rolling using a d20. I haven't seen innovation on this scale since blades in the dark d6 scaling skills. Very hyped for content about this system
I was skeptical at first too but the more I've watched and the more I've learned about the system it makes so much sense. It's streamlined and smooth. I know people are complaining about you're not doing big numbers but everything's just scaled down. So say for instance you do 25 damage against an enemy that has 40 health. DC 20 that would be like doing 6 damages against something that has 10 health. The ratios are still the same and the big hits there it's just not as big numbers. I am so excited for the system in the potential that it has that it has. Combat looks so much fun 💜. Also Coach that character sheet looks so awesome. 🤩
I've been enjoying the DC20 content and there is something special about someone being so enthusiastic about their work. I really like the dynamic system. When I first saw the stream the damage system was announced I was a bit apprehensive, but since then it has really grown on me and has made me more excited. Everything about the system sounds like a well oiled machine, yet one filled with passion and brimming with creativity.
I think there will be a bit of an odd taste too the high numbers being lower than they would be in any other TTRPG, but I think players would adjust what "BIG" numbers are when playing the game. I also think my table has the advantage of being online where there is that disconnect between the group and the math, as no one else in the group just has silence instead of getting to see the numbers add up. I usually would not cite a digital group as a pro, but I think that disconnect will create a greater ease to adapting to the loss of the tension building math.
Keep up the good work and I am looking forward to the game when its whole has come to fruition.
My one real concern is that people like bigger numbers. I get the mathematical advantages, and I’m thrilled with the streamlining effect of damage automatically flowing from the attack roll. I’m only concerned that players (especially current 5e/PF2e players) will be disappointed with “low” damage.
Which doesn’t mean I won’t be trying to convince my group to try DC20.
"bigger numbers" is a relative thing. For example, in Final Fantasy, a "big number" is 9999 damage. But doing 9999 damage in a single attack in D&D is unheard of.
DC20 will have "big numbers" as well. They won't be 9999, but we're not playing Final Fantasy. It's also not 5e.
@@AJBernard this is a good point. If a 2 is normal damage, and a Critical Hit is 6 damage, then rolling a natural 20 is a big moment because you deal triple damage. The Players still feel like their getting big numbers, there just not rolling several dice to get there.
My reasoning supporting the original comment. Logically yes the fears are unfounded. But who ever said humans are logical beings. (Monkey brain go brrr!!!)
@Eddie Blanton and a critical will almost always deal more where in 5e you can crit and rolll all 1s and deal less then a regular attack (which is why I always do max dmg+a roll for crits)
@@dbzdiehard7209 I use the same rule. Criticals should feel critical. =) I'm looking forward to the DC20 system!
Pros: streamlined (no unnecessary distractions like rolling additional unnecessary dice after already hiting, less math and lost time on thing nobody cares about), always great base damage, roleplay provoking options
Cons: people like hitting hard so you might need to implement a variant rule to multiply all damage and health by 10 to 1000 (we humans got monkey brain).
Amazing system by me DC. Looking forward to more of it. Take care 😇❤️
Also some of us like to hog all the spotlight and if they could they would roll for an eternity, so please, forget about those fools and concentrate your energy on useful stuff (this is not useful this is commonly known fact).
Not necessarily. If you use some type of platform like roll20, normally the damage rolls are included with the attack roll, you literally do not lose any type of time.
Making the game like Yu-Gi-Oh isn't going to fix anything, and not to mention, the numbers are going to be factors of 10 or 100, or there's going to be decimal points in the small numbers system.
I have been using a hard rule that rolls 25 and above inflict a status effect (depending on the damage type) this status effect is also applied to nat 20s, its simple to remember and gets the martials doing alot of utility stuff beyond just damage. it also makes things like bless and the help action really strong.
Oh that’s fun!
I thinking I might include something similar for high attack rolls and crits
But I think the extra damage might scale with their proficiency bonus. Add proficiency to damage per 5 increment above AC
A low level character exceeds by 10 = 4 extra damage due to 2x2
Higher level character exceeds by 10 = 8 extra damage due to 4x2
Love the way this sounds! I’m currently working on a project MEANT to become a video game, but while I build the world and what not im making it as a TTRPG and Id LOVE to implement this system into it
I'm not sure how tedious everyone thinks gathering, rolling and adding numbers are but that's usually not what bogs down combat on my tables. It's usually people getting distracted and checking their phones. I personally love lending another player my dice to roll a lot of damage because it makes me feel like some of that damage is thanks to me. Obviously not literally but it makes me feel involved and just increases the fun. And I personally think the joy of rolling a lot of dice outweighs the convenience of this system.
True, a lot of the problem is phones, but most of the time the reason people get on their phones is because they’re just sitting there waiting for their turn. If you take away those wait times and make it so that everyone at the table is actually engaging in what’s happening, then that becomes much less of a problem. So without the math and everything the game can become a lot more engaging and fun for everyone. I do agree though getting to roll a ton of dice is a lot of fun. I just feel like getting to have a good time with friends, fighting a monster with have fast-paced combat, is a lot better. I dunno though that might just be me.
Its a massive time saver, and being able to take actions off your turn with multiple reactions means people *can’t* be on their phones if they want to effectively contribute.
Sounds like a fun new way to express combat and I’m excited to give it a try!
This kind of reminds me of World of Darkness. In there you have dice pools, you roll your pool to hit and you need X successes to hit. Every success above that deals 1 extra damage and you deal your weapon damage as well.
WOD one of the best systems ever. Very underrated
The video I've been waiting for 🎉🎉 Thanks, Coach!
How would you differentiate between a weapon that is accurate and weak, vs a weapon that is clumsy but does a lot of damage, with this system? By merging everything into a single roll you potentially lose that granularity. Simplifying has the side effect of reducing the nuances associated which can also feel bad for the people who enjoy their characters feeling unique and distinct.
Ultimately I am 100% fine losing that granularity. i do not think the nuance of that type of weapon would make a character feel less unique, there are SO many things to make them unique, I think that will be taken care of. I love the feedback and will look out for that for sure.
You could have a weapon not deal heavy and brutal hits if you wanted to focus on its accuracy and you could have a weapon ONLY deal damge on a heavy and brutal hit... so you still could accomplish what you wanted if needed :)
Would be cool when you get a nat 20 that the different weapon types have different effects instead of letting that be up to the player. axes create bleed, swords cuts through enemies and hits others, maces pushes enemies away and daggers create advantage on the next attack
Or maybe the mix of the two?
A few options depending on the weapon, and the player can choose from these each time they crit?
I like your idea so much, it would make a real difference between weapons, not just the different damage. But I also like the idea of the players being able to choose how they want to deliver that critical hit, and having more (mechanically) different options.
Hey! Just a quick suggestion. You might want to checkout Spheres of Power for 5e. It's an alternative magic system that might give you ideas for your RPG.
Personally I'm just hoping you do something like that bc I hate traditional DND spellcasting. Awesome video btw!
unpopular opinion here, ive been watching a bunch of your dc20 videos and you have so many complex features with complex mechanics that is going to be a nightmare to remember everything for the player
I like the idea of adding something more to massive hits to low AC opponents. I'll have to create some sort of house rule that adds more punch to an attack based on how much you go past its AC. 🤔
Can’t wait to try this out, it sounds so amazing!
I had concerns about the action economy, but not rolling for damage is fine in my opinion. Lots of games follow that approach for decades already.
This is Amazing! the thing that I hate the most on RPGs is rolling a 1 on a D12, specially after a crit.
As someone who is also making an rpg (though mostly for personal use) I love this system, I think certain features should still call for rolled damage, perhaps as a way to make spell damage more risky to pull off or something of the sort. Adding more gambling is something I find to be a little exciting.
I made a similar system that tried to simulate "force = mass x acceleration" and skill. Weight of the weapon x (str/2), +1 per pt exceeding to-hit roll. If you exceed to-hit by 5, the target gets a "minor" status effect based on damage type. If you exceed by 10, it's a "major" status effect. If you crit and exceed 5, the minor status effect is upgraded to a major one. If you crit and exceed by 10, it's a death save.
Armor didn't just help your AC, but it also reduced damage taken, and the effective amount you've exceeded the attack by, for the purposes of the added system.
Oh. Going after physics would be cool. Keep in mind that multiplication is more difficult to do by hand than addition. Maybe adding weapon weight plus strength is more accessible. Video games can get away with having more complex formulas. The computer does the calculations while running the game. I recently learned that Pokemon has a crazy complicated formula for damage. It is surprising since the game franchise is so kid friendly. If you can think of cool formulas, good for you. I am just saying to keep accessebility in mind. You may be better off using the fancier formulas for designing video games.
I assumed it wouldn't be so different from D&D, but this...I love it. It's probably my favorite thing so far about your system.
Just a question. So in your system you reveal the armorclass of a monster? Or do you do this secretly? Or do you just tell the amount of extra damage you get so they guess a little where the AC is? Or do you use something else?
I can't tell what he plans or thinks to be the best, but for my tableI think I would only tell my players what type of hit they've got (normal, hard, or brutal).
Yes, after a few turns of combat they could guess the armor class, but the fight will probably not last that long anyway, and they can also find it out if I only tell them whether they hit or not.
Of course people who focus more on those numbers can find it out earlier but with my group we are lucky to not have any metagamers, so for my game I'm not concerned about that.
Rather than just saying “pathfinder 2e”… for those that don’t know, exceeding the needed to hit by 10 is a crit. And weapons have features/traits. I have a few concerns with what you just said about DC20 system: 1) redoing all monsters to have lower HP seems like a big job and doesn’t let you pick something up easily in the d20 ecosystem, 2) regular hits where the player only beats the AC by one are not going to ever do much damage, and a high AC and some damage resistance makes one invulnerable.
He already customizes most, if not all, of his monsters from other games as a DM. So everything he builds should fit his system style. That’s my guess.
This is brilliant. I can't wait to play it!
TORG has a very similar system where weapons have a base value then you increase depending on how well you roll. I even did this in a home brew game of mine and it works great. In my experience most D&D players will miss it. Those that play multiple systems will not. Those that just play your game and have never played any other....will not know any better.
I’ve been trying to work with a similar idea, that the relative success of the attack determines the damage. I love this idea in a D20 system just like I do in my D6 stuff.
Hype!!! Loving this new system!!
glad to see you getting the good ideas from pathfinder and incorporating them into your system!
What's this, a former math teacher telling me to do less math? Can I skip leg day while I'm at it, Coach?
Side note, have you had a chance to see the D&D movie? I know it's hard to get to the theater as a new dad, but I'd love to hear your review if you get the chance!
I think something that might be cool for people that cant give up the randomness of rolling for damage (kinda me) maybe enchanting or improving your weapons or magical effects on the weapons could be a roll. Or maybe a class feature could be a roll. "Roll you smite die to see how your gold favours your hit" maybe its just one or two classes that work with damage die. Oooorrr maybe that would be too confusing and i need to let it go
As long as this doesn't wash away the paltry amount of customisation that comes from picking weapons in dnd currently, then I can see this working. Probably the change that excites me the least so far, although that'd not necessarily to say it's bad. I don't think you managed to convince me that damage dice rolling is bad, so we're starting from different positions there. I definitely think there's something to be said for rewarding big hits above AC, but in my own design I'd probably customise that for different types of weaponry - big hits deal massive dmg from heavy weapons, whereas finesse weapons provide flatter damage, with a bonus for *just* beating the AC
I hope the new DC20 book has various rules to implement different parts of the system into 5e, so DMs can slowly integrate existing players or cherry-pick their favorite concepts. For example, what if we like everyone but we want 5e damage dice + HP? Having those options will certainly draw in a larger group of new players.
I like this idea a lot. It is important to make some of your mechanics different than 5e. We already have 5e and too many designers make a 90% copy. Why play a game like that? I am interested in NEW ideas and yours have been very good.
I personally love rolling for damage, but add damage for better results looks amazing, i love pf2e system of crits and i might add your system to my 5e games
I like this system. Too much have I been the one in the group to roll the worst numbers to then finally roll something good... to then roll for damage and get the lowest number. This system takes that away and, instead, increase the damage the better the hit roll is. This mechanic is actually pretty cool! I'm going to definitely implement this hit die system for my campaign.
So, I & a few of my friends would be fine with either because math is our thing. (engineer & math teacher) Others not so much because they are not great at math & exhausted from heavy work. I'm not certain how your play is less math intensive you have to know the "Roll minus AC divided by 5" if I understood correctly, which sounds a bit more like math than a separate roll adding a flat modifier. Additionally, it has been said at least since D&D 3.0 that the real damage comes from the modifier & not the dice roll. You may save up-front math versus at the table math, but it seems for those who struggle to be equally cumbersome.
I agree with you but I think that's why he puts the different ACs for heavy hit and brutal hit right on the character sheet. And I imagine he would put them right on the monster stats. That way you know the exact AC you need to hit for those categories without having to calculate each time whether you beat them by 5, 10 etc.
I made my own d20 attack system but it requires quite a bit of homebrew
I asked my group, we all like rolling dice and wouldn't want to lose damage dice completely as it's part of playing the game. However we did concede that too many dice can be annoying, so we would like to see less "8d8+2" and more "2d8+20"
I still think its fun to roll for damage i took a while yo think. But i think theres something lost not rolling.
Because some of the most fun our table had is seeing just how epic a hit it was or how epic an fail it was. The streamline feels like a great computer gane but less tabletopy
Most of your issues with Rolling for Damage is not a problem in a VTT, where Damage can be rolled automatically at the same time as the hit roll. Not saying those issues aren't an issue, but that a good amount of the players might not experience those issues as commonly as you thought. The only point which really sticks is the disappointing damage rolls, which I absolutely agree with.
Great points about some of that being alleviated by playing on line! very true!
Breaking news: D&D player discovers something that other games have been doing for decades.
Here's another thing: those times when you roll 'all the dice' on a big spell or a big crit... The more dice you roll the more that you statistically are likely to be closer to the average, making rolling those dice even more pointless the more of them there are.
Maybe have actions that can only be used at the time of a heavy attack. That would really hype up high rolls and make advantage so important
Hmmmm, I was leaning towards more dice, rather than less. Combat drag is a concern though.
If you can see how lame it is to roll well for a hit and then to roll low damage, I hope you see now why rolling for hit points when gaining a level is a terrible idea! If it's "not fun" to roll a 1 for damage after a high roll to hit, why would it be fun to roll a 1 for new hit points after possibly weeks of playing?
Do you get rid of copper and silver in your dc20 game? Who wants to keep track of sub increments
I think it would be fun for role-playing purposes to still have silver copper etc. but yeah for just purely keeping track it should always be in goold to keep it simple
@@detectiveMM
The majority of coins in the Middle Ages were silver coins like the penny, farthing, groat, etc. Only the nobility would have access to gold coins. Copper coins were almost non-existent.
@@andynonimuss6298 fair enough but fantasy worlds don’t have to be exactly like the real middle ages
@@detectiveMM What you say is very true. In my own personal experience with RPGs for the last 40+ years, I feel that Medieval culture, its limited technology, and its general way of life was very interesting, and makes for a much richer roleplaying experience when history is followed a little closer and not all over the place like D&D.
@@andynonimuss6298 I do like grittier games where healing isn’t as easy and magic isn’t so prevalent so there’s some overlap there
I can't wait for the full release. Definitely be picking it up.
(Edited after playtesting ) This idea incorporates the glancing blow video... Take a weapon that does 8 average damage with modifiers. Use this average as base damage. Here is how it works... If an attack equals the AC and HPs are above 50% of max HP, base damage -3, if the HPs are below 50% of max HP, base damage +3 to simulate bloodied condition. Then for attacks up to AC +3, base damage -2 (Glancing hit). Then for attacks above AC +3, base damage (Hit). Then for attacks above AC +7, base damage +2 (Heavy hit). Then for attacks above AC +11, base damage +4 (Brutal hit)... The average damage for all potential attacks is just a little over average damage including a critical hit. The math works out perfectly!!! ... The result of the dice gives more levels of fun.
I'm curious as to how much HP characters and monsters get per level for DC20.
This damage system is similar to how I did damage for DtwenD (a system that currently exists mainly in my Development Vlog). The difference is that in DtwenD, the damage you deal is the amount by which you beat your opponent's defense (i.e. beat it by 8, deal 8 damage). Strength/Dexterity is already incorporated into the attack roll, so there's no need to add it again to damage. As for armor and shields, they act as separate hit point pools that the player can choose to use in place of their own hit points (or Grit, in DtwenD terms).
I like dice. I’ll continue to roll for damage. Cool idea though
Binging the playlist lol, so far this system reminds me a lot of HKRPG, my favorite system thus far
Oh wow. I think one of the major weaknesses of DND is that it is too dependednt on luck and randomness. Having one dice roll per turn is an improvement. It reduces the amount of randomness in the game. It also has the benifot of speeding up the game. This DC20 eliminates the damage roll and merges things to an attack roll. I did make my own house rule for DND. Players roll only the danage roll for thier turn. Then they add bonuses on top of that. There is adding the proficiency bonus. There is also adding the ability score based on what the attack is. Anything except constitution can apply. Defense works differently. Creatures have a bonus based on thier armor instead of and armor class. I take armor class and subtract ten to get and armor bonus. The damage roll of an attack is subtracted by the armor bonus of the opponent. There is damage absorbdion for armor. I think this is more realistic and fun. Missing attacks agianst high armor opponents sucks. I would rather have high armor opponents substract more damage. There are spells that deal damage abd require a saving throw. Even fireball is like this. I have a houserule that these attacks are calculated the same way as regular damage rolls, except that they are subtracted by the ability score instead of the armor bonus. The ability score matches the one for the kind of save. If I was making my own new game entirely, I wouldn't have dice rolls. I would just have every hit have the same base damage and have perfect accuracy. That is nice. It would also be really fast to figure out. The base damage can still be modified with bonuses. It just won't be random.
DC, is there any way you could offer the same type of alternative for save or suck spells? I think this concept could make those much more entertaining to play and exciting for the players and DM’s running the opposing characters. Now your rolls would have extra meaning and how bad you fail would really affect something. Not to mention, now every stat has extra meaning because dumping a stat can literally be life or death versus an inconvenience. Great work as always. Not sure I’m on board, but I’m always glad to try one of your suggestions.
As a patron who's seen some live-streams, I don't want to steal Coach's thunder, so I won't say too much, but due to the mana system every spell will do something, regardless of rolls. Everything is also roll to hit... plus more
@@damianspence, thank you for that note. I’ve been in and out of the game design process. But rolling for everything makes sense by Coach’s philosophy. Thank you for letting me know. It was the first live stream I’ve caught in quite awhile. Very enjoyable.
Looking forward to trying out the new system!
Funny idea
Clumsy dagger
Deals 1d4 damage
Seems like a fun magic item to give
As a player, I want to roll the damage dice. As a DM, I don't let the players know the AC of the target. I feel a lot of this system is simply making things more complex and will slow things down.
I am not sold on static damage for a weapon. I do also like what your saying in rolling a 27 is the exact same as a 15 but instead of using static damage still use specific damage die for weapons and every 5 you beat the AC by adds a simple +1 to the damage. So a d8 + 1 , d8 + 2 etc. This still keeps a damage die and gives you the feel of making a mighty strike without scoring a crit. Just my 2 cents.
Tbh weapons having a static damage value is a good idea but I feel it should be based off the average roll of the die type then adding pluses if you get high enough. But how does this mix with your AC/EC system.
I think 5e had the optional "average damage" rule for games that didn't want to roll dice.
What happens if I roll 15 or 20 over an AC?
15 would be 3 damage and 20 would be 4 damage! :) CRAZY SWINGS THERE!
I do 2d12 and your damage mod is the difference between your roll and the target AC if you roll 20 on 10 Ac you get +10 damage making it so when you roll really good to hit, you see it do more damage
But my damage, HP, Ac numbers can also get really high
Interesting but does that mean any barbarian would hit has hard as a bard as long as they both succeed their attack roll? Don't weapons have different stats, then? I'd love to use that system though, but I'd love some clarification too :)
I'm liking this. Higher accuracy has so much more value
Seems to me to be a missed opportunity within a missed opportunity, streamlining-wise. Why not just have a hit do flat damage (a short sword does 2 hp for hitting an AC 15 with a dice roll of 15 (including modifiers), THEN add 1 hp of damage for every point over the target AC. Meaning, a total hit score of, say 19, does 2+4 more damage (the +4 derived from the four numbers higher than the target AC. This would then be value added for attacks and their corresponding modifiers (fighters with high strength would reap the benefits of that same strength statistically and you couldn’t eliminate the need for a second roll for damage altogether (with nat 20s still doing double damage, but based on the total modifiers included) So, in this example, a fighter with a 18 STR rolls a nat 20 on a 15 AC, therefore: +4 from STR, +2 proficiency bonus, short sword flat damage: 2…
Total damage: 8 (from all modifiers listed above) x 2 = 16 total damage.
This would address every concern you listed, streamline combat turns, AND make those higher rolls count.
And we haven’t even discussed how this benefits rogues or magic items yet, or spell-casters magic attack “to hits”.
Turning everything into a ratio is good, but does not take it far enough, imo. If your goal is to make these rolls have more impact while also quickening the combat turn.
I need to bookmark this comment.
Are the characters in DC20 3d6 right down the line chumps like in Dungeon Crawl Classics, Five Torches Deep, Shadowdark, Castles and Crusades, Old School Essentials, and OSRIC?
Your system seems great. Does buying into the alpha auto-grant beta or beyond access?
In D&D the damage roll indicates how well you hit, the attack roll just shows how stylishly you got past the target's defences! There are games that do it differently - that's just the rules of D&D. People commonly roll to hit and damage at the same time so I'm not sure how much time it'll save.
Idk that sounds kind of dumb compared to everything else in dnd
Am i understanding, ac=15, attack roll with greataxe=18, the damage is the difference between (3), plus a static weapon damage modifier using average for the die (6), dealing 9 damage and for every 5 above the ac i add 1 to it?
The biggest problem with that approach is that a lot of TTRPG players, if not most of the players, love to collect dice. Your own sponsor for this video is a dice company. Players want to roll their d4, d8... One of the biggest complains I hear is that the d12 doesn't get enough uses in D&D.
Your system sounds very simple and very cool. Reminds me a bit of Vampire the Masquerade that only uses d10. And seems very beginner friendly like 3D&T, that only uses d6. But it won't please the dice goblins out there.
I may try this with Castles and Crusades.
i think its true that the rolling of damage in dnd is not good how it is but i really like to rolle for damage because it cinnd off mmakes it more interisting to hit something because it can change that much everytime
but i think this works way better for allot of people so thanks for the hard work behind all of this and i am thankfull that we are shifting away from the ,,dnd is perfekt and everyone should play it,, mentalaty and it is nice and refreshing to see new options pop up everywere
thank you
Kinda the stuff i thought for my d20 only system ideas.
great dice -- great idea -- this from a 43yr DM
A small disagreement with the Smite Crit. The stall while doing the math is suspenseful and that's a bonus for a lot of people
I'm sorry, but that has been done better before. Honestly maybe if you hit harder you can get some sort of extra weapon perk like a trip or disarm, but even games with low hp like Fallout 2d20 uses dice. Even if their d6 damage system is odd with 1 and 2 being raw numbers, 3 and 4 being 0 damage, and 5 and 6 being 1 damage plus an effect, you still have fun rolling and adding up the numbers, even if it takes time.
Are you going to keep the ruling from AC and EC from your book?
Yes there will be Damage Reduction yes! :)
I have done the math on this all dice sets hold an 11, 22, 33, 44 average sequencing. Thus the math on this can be proven, its not a hack.
love the idea!
hey, heres one, why not use that but mix it with when you hit at 5 or higher above the AC, its a crit, but ten over AC is a double crit,
Besides the d20 what other dice are used in the dc20 rpg
The removal of damage dice is unfortunately the one thing preventing me from investing in DC 20. Yes it's a bit slower with physical dice (my group plays digitally, removing the math issue), but it adds an extra element of suspense. IS this hit going to finish a monster, or is it going to hang on and strike back?
I am however planning to snag the idea of brutal hits in the form of 1 extra die added to the damage roll.
@@frostphoenix8256 so far I’ll say that from all the play testing, I’ve never felt any negative loss of suspense, and if a monster will die or not.
Damage fluctuates so much due to the dice rolls, extra effects, class features, weapon, properties that you never the same damage twice.
And it also has an added benefit of everyone at the table can see the damage add up to its final number and keeps
engagement.
I would rather have more engaged players that moves the game forward based on how high you roll and tactics, instead of dragging out the damage, potentially having terribly low roles and so on
100% respect your stance, but I would say to try it out, cause it’s the biggest thing that people have said they change their mind on after feeling it out
Thank you for the feedback!
Some great number, let's say it is 42...
A man of culture!
(Edit: spelling)
How would fireball damage?
You could make your life far easier by simply using the difference between an attack-score (previously aka as "damage") of one (or several) opponents and a defense-score (previously aka "AC") as the amount of damage taken?! If several monsters attack and each has an attack-score of D6, three of them have an attack-score of 3d6. That will make monsters like goblins far more dangerous, as there is strength in numbers (unlike with D&D, where it does not matter at all, whether you fight one or eight goblins at the same time).
Fading sun's. The higher you roll, better success. Until you roll over your skill, then you fail
Brilliant use of D20.
Someone must convert that system to d&D
Unless your going to give different weapons other abilities all this will do is make every weapon feel the same, much more so than they already do. As a few people have said already, you could just use average damage instead of rolling for damage. If your really want to have beating the armor class by a lot do more damage you could just use your method of +1 damage per 5 above the AC and add it to the average damage.
He has said in a previous video that he has an entire weapon system in the works to ensure that different weapons feel different.
So basically Pathfinder 2e?
And by that I mean the succeed by more than 5 to get additional effects. Although to be fair, the system is much closer to Savage Worlds. And don't take it as me disparaging your system. Pathfinder and Savage Worlds are great places to draw inspiration from. Both are really good systems.
@@helotaxi correct me if I'm wrong, but PF 2e still rolls damage dice, right?
CoughTracyHickmanCough
DC has been transparent since the beginning
@@eddieblanton2981 Yes still roll dmg and you can roll less dmg with a crit than with a regular attack.
So exited by this high math unintuitive system?
So a nat 20 is essentially +10 to your hit.
Frostgrave, Stargrave, Rangers of Shadowdeep....
Interesting system! My worry is this does create a bit more back and forth between players and DMs during each attack due to there being multiple ACs to take into account, similar to the multiple AC issues seen in 3.5e.
Meanwhile a roll in 5e is often "Natural 19" or "Natural 2" etc, such that frequently a player or DM can skip the mental mathematics and at that point just focus on damage.
Now, I don't disagree that rolling for damage can be a drag, so there's definitely a case to be made for set damage, but there's a balance to be found of time vs fun. I've often told my paladin in game "let me know when you know the damage, if you do the damage you got to do the math 😉" and moved on in the initiative. The impact of the crit is there whether or not the players know the result of the hit, and it gives them something to do off turn.
I could see Heavy Hit and Brutal Hit being a useful mechanic to wrap into a feat, as this means that the complexity of multiple ACs is limited to particular PCs.
Bought into your Kickstarter a looooong time ago, when can I get a product to my doorstep?
Pretty cool
Yeah, it's a shame D&D does not have degrees of success for damage. A lot of modern day game systems already have degrees of success.