Welcome back! Gonna be honest, this video resonates with me a lot. I really want to love roleplaying, however a lot of the games I have been playing in care too much about fighting being the main form of "having fun" and DnD5e as a game is... pretty lackluster when its played this way. Here I thought all my complaints about 5e was basically me alone.
Nope! It's not just you. Although I am a bit of an alien because I avoid combat like the plague. One, because roleplaying and combat hate each other, and also because I genuinely find combat uninteresting. It's very difficult to get right; trying to create a situation where violence is the best solution and narratively interesting, but is also mechanically fun or deadly enough to be engaging.
My friends and I started to play DnD quite recently. It was an incredibly fun experience to talk to locals and negotiate with some of them in order to get information about a murder we were trying to solve (which we failed once. Without getting into the nitty gritty of the conversation and making my comment take an eternity to read; it got pretty brutal. Surprised we managed to beat feet without getting mauled to death.) and of course, solve the mystery imposed upon us! So, with how recently we started our first short test campaign; It's nothing short of a miracle that this video came out when it did. It was very interesting and quite fascinating to watch. The videos you make are always a treat! You go, sir! I'm certain that this info will help us when we start a bigger campaign.
That's fantastic to hear, I hope it goes well. To be honest, a lot of my points in the video come from a cynical place. There are a lot of systems in 5e/Pathfinder/etc that are very enticing to new players; things like alignment and classes/archetypes. They appeal to anyone with a history with video games as they can somewhat recognize those systems. I'd definitely suggest experimenting with them if you are new, as it can be fun to make characters based on "I'm going to make a lawful evil paladin" when you are starting out. From my experience, that method only become a problem after your game group starts to crave stories/adventures with a bit more depth, which is exactly when alignment and "what class am I going to play?" starts to hold you back from thinking about the things that actually affect the longterm health of your game: EX: your party's role play dynamic, which becomes far more appealing to experiment with after you've played a few traditional "we all met in a tavern" style adventures. Instead of meeting in a tavern, your might start session 1 as a group villainous mercenaries who only work as a team due to their loyalty to their charismatic leader (who is not a DM PC, very important). Games such as WH40K's Rogue Trader sort of force this dynamic by having someone at your table be the captain of the ship who calls all the shots, which isn't a bad starting point for people who want to break away from the standard adventurer group dynamic: AKA a group of murder hobos who all think they are the main character.
We're actually contemplating starting a run of Rogue Trader after our small session has been finished since we're big fans of the intergalactic hell that is Warhammer 40K. I really appreciate the additional advice as well, by the way. I'll be sure to suggest some of this to the boys. Overall, I'd say this video and additional comment have given me a lot of interesting things to think about, and I appreciate that! I'm definitely looking forward to the next play session as DnD has nearly limitless potential. Literally anything is possible as long as you have the imagination to make it happen. Heck, maybe I can get my buds to agree to start a Shin Megami Tensei session. But, that'll probably be a looooooong while from now considering we can typically only get together once every month or so, haha! By the way, this is perhaps a little off-topic but do you know about the webcomic The Weekly Roll? It's a story of a band of psychopath murderhobos that find themselves in the absolutely most hilarious situations I could possibly imagine. It's an absolute knee slapper and I highly recommend it in case you're looking for something to read. And once again, thank you very much for the video and this additional comment. Very interesting all around!
@@Mahagion Weird story, but I used to hate WH40K because my neighbour used to talk about it all the time back in high school. He bought me an orc warboss miniature once, and I just had no idea what the fuck it was as it came in pieces, and I didn't know it was a game at all, it just seemed like this very lame thing where you painted little armies. One of my DM friends essentially tricked me into liking WH40K through Rogue Trader. I had no idea what the universe was about, but I kept throwing out all these fucking oddball ideas that were meant to be dismissive, but he wrote up this character sheet for what was essentially a daemonhost character aboard a Rogue Trader vessel. It was essentially a one shot, but after that we played an actual game once I had the idea of the setting down a little better, and this time I played as the Rogue Trader. That captain + crew dynamic is what I think fully sold me on the idea of tabletop RPGs as a whole, as I had no idea that there were games that would essentially favour one players position over the others, as it seems like something reserved for the dungeon master. TL;DR: Rogue Trader is probably the reason I still play + give a shit about tabletop games, and now I'm like 40+ books into the Horus Heresy.
@@SwanCC Hahaha! Nice! I don't think I've ever heard of someone getting tricked into liking Warhammer 40K, let alone being a reason why you still play table top games. That's a pretty weird and funny story, indeed. The main reason I was almost instantly sold on Warhammer 40K is because it's this satire paste of all the clichés one could come up with, amplified in the most gruesome manner imaginable to the point where most stories can't even take themselves seriously. Yet despite that, there's also room for all kinds of tales with surprising amounts of depth. For being a grim dark space world of death and misery, written by some British company to completement their boardgame that might actually murder my wallet one day, it has a lot of potential. It's kind of like the Star Wars I never knew I wanted, but have been hooked on ever since my father introduced me to Blood Bowl. Tangent aside though, it's pretty cool that you ended up likng Warhammer 40K, though I absolutely understand why some people wouldn't vibe with it. I have a few horror stories about minifigures that were broken in one way or the other because my hands were too jittery, plus painting can be a pain without the right tools, haha!
The last section reminds me so much of my last game group. A lot of descriptions of damage points, no details of combat until we hit zero hitpoints. Plus, one person usually got the glory of the final strike, making everyone else's efforts feel pointless.
As a DM who's been training his players to more ROLEPLAY this game than fight through it, I'm so happy to see someone thinks alike to me. I have a fully homebrewed game and we only use charatcer cheets to bridge the gap between our human ability to accomplish something and the fantasy world. A situation I find myself in a lot is my players thinking up of ideas, but then looking to ME to see if their characters could EVER think of something similar. Typically, any DM would have you roll, or would punish you for your character being "stupid". But I live by the rule that if you are truly able to think of this YOURSELF, then you are in touch with your own character. When my players feel "trapped" or "unable to do anything" something they feel frustrated, but I reassure them (knowing how they act when they're not in character) that this is not from them, it's from their CHARACTER. I used to play by the charactersheet dictating my every move for who my characters were. I've abandoned that now, and only use the sheet as a method of raising steaks, or truly testing one's ability, or mettle. Describing the look of weapons, armour, clothing and facial features is one of my favourite things to do, and at first I thought I wasn't playing this game right! It's so reassuring to see someone cares about the story and roleplay as much as I do. :D keep up the good work, you earned my sub!
I'm of the opinion that DMs that use dice rolls to punish players, or even have it in their head that they need to 'punish' players for poor decision making don't have the right mentality to DM. That's the dungeon crawler "DM vs. Player" paradigm that most people have moved on from at this point. I'd rather play a CRPG and let the computer tell me when I fucked up if that's how the game is going to be run. At least then there is quick saving. The philosophy behind "What my character is thinking?" Vs. "What am I thinking?" is an interesting one for sure, especially if you've gone out of your way to make a character who is categorically different than you are. I like to think that 'most' of my characters are more competent than I am, so as long as I'm not benefiting from meta/foreknowledge, then I'll assume my character (who is actually experiencing the situation much more vividly than I ever could) can put together the same conclusion. Doing things 'out of character' can also be very important too, especially if the situation calls for it. If you have a character who hates violence but is thrust into a deadly situation where they and/or their companions might die, then maybe they will pick up a sword and fight? It's out of character, but you can always reflect on that situation afterwards to explore why your character is a pacifist to begin with. Stuff like that is a pretty natural way to lead into talking about your character's backstory as well, as if you've established your hate of violence well enough before hand, then the other characters will likely want to know what it is you are thinking after a moment like that.
@@SwanCC I adore how many ways DM's and players can approch this game. I'm already using some of your points to help shape the way I play and make things a lot more fun for my players. I've never really been a big fan of DM vs Player either, I feel it makes the game a toxic mess of trying to out do the other or send the other into a spiralling headache. Whilst most of my and my players characters typically stay true to us in a way that isn't really self inserts (more method acting than anything), then I assume that if my character WOULD think of something then it's only fair enough to give them that liberty and assume our PC's are smarter. (though in my campaign's case, we tend to keep what we know and what our PC's can accomplish pretty on par) Out of charcter moments are some of my favourites and really just help define who they truly are by what forces them to break their boundaries. I've had many of times when I've played in other games where I was punished for my PC doing something I had sworn they wouldn't do. But personally I find it to be wonderfully fun. Ty for the response dude, thanks for bringing to light some of the more divergent ways of experiencing this awesome tabletop game
this is a very good video man, i usually follow the classes for inspiration for a character and how to build them because i don't get better ideas for them i'll definitely take what was written to heart for the future
Hi, Shawn. Me again. I really appreciate your insights recorded in this RUclips electronic video, particularly about broadening your horizons as a DM AND player to the definitions and wordings of the game. While you should respect the skill of professional game developers as other creative minds, players should recognize that not every system is going to meld with the kind of game they want to play. Personally, I prefer exploration, relationships, high schools, and particularly engaging with supernatural creatures like gods and demons, so naturally we play a game far more rules lite, but I will have to check out Degenesis just as soon as I finish up on Persona 3 Reload. Goodbye for now, and I'll see you in the next video!
There's a bunch of systems from various games my group has been stapling onto whatever thing we are playing that month. That Arc System I mention briefly at the end has been the real main stay, but there are also a lot of rules lite systems that have some great ideas. Monster of the Week (a setting for Powered by the Apocalypse) is worth looking into for people interested in mid/high fantasy, and it has some fun ideas on how to get characters talking to each other. Session zero for my games now involves me pointing a gun at my players and asking them "how do your characters know each other?"; and I better not hear anyone say "we met in a bar." The party dynamic/fun being had at the table increases tenfold when the other characters you are interacting with are: your estranged twin brother who maybe killed your parents, a cracked out conspiracy theorist who trusts you implicitly for some reason, and the ghost who is stuck haunting your group.
@@SwanCC Yeah I had to put up with way too many characters who have to be desperately strung along into becoming a party, I don't mind a causal meeting but I don't want to have to endure the same song and dance again. I mostly like to play around with pathfinder, but on occasion I play around in other systems - there was that half-finished fallout based my girlfriend fished out of some ancient Google drives that we had a lot of fun with and a fandom specific cyberpunk system that only uses d6s. And I've been considering making homebrew my own system for the future chance that I finally run a game in my own setting. Though I'm daunted by the prospect of making an entire system from scratch.
@@maelys8851 You can also try adapting a system from one that exists, or chances are someone has done it for you. I'm a fan of really low fantasy, so high level D&D/Pathfinder starts to become a bit of a nightmare. For my own setting I'm working on I am adapting a version of Epic 6 for Pathfinder, which caps the player's levels at 6. EXP is used on feats and other things that add more gameplay options for the players, but doesn't have them casting power word: kill. That way, even when the players are 'max level', if I want to use something like a dragon, there is still that holy fuck moment of: "oh, that's a fucking dragon, we might die." Also, to your first point. I lost so much hair as a DM trying to find and write new ways to make my players like each other. Session after session of hearing my players offhandedly say things like "why are we even adventuring together?" Now I leave it in the hands of the players themselves and let them figure it out during session zero. It also makes that first session go so much smoother. Instead of the players awkwardly introduce themselves in character to people who kind of already know who they are (because of character creation), they can instead focus on figuring out how those characters interact with one another as they already have some history.
Why do i get the feeling that you got a player that reeeally likes to play bard and constantly tries to unrealistically seduce everything in their sorroundings... again.
Most if not all anecdotes in the video are based on something that's happened to me. I can confirm that in a Storm King's Thunder campaign there was a bard named Ted who was such an insane villain he should have had a red health bar above his head.
I clicked on this video with full intentions of arguing. I do have arguments but I realize they don't matter. In the end of the day, TTRPG are all jumbled messes of barely comprehensible rule sets intended to encourage group story telling. So I just encourage people to play the way they are comfortable but be respectable to the rest of the group. DM included. Also 5th edition is garbage and no one will convince me otherwise.
Welcome back!
Gonna be honest, this video resonates with me a lot. I really want to love roleplaying, however a lot of the games I have been playing in care too much about fighting being the main form of "having fun" and DnD5e as a game is... pretty lackluster when its played this way. Here I thought all my complaints about 5e was basically me alone.
Nope! It's not just you. Although I am a bit of an alien because I avoid combat like the plague. One, because roleplaying and combat hate each other, and also because I genuinely find combat uninteresting. It's very difficult to get right; trying to create a situation where violence is the best solution and narratively interesting, but is also mechanically fun or deadly enough to be engaging.
My friends and I started to play DnD quite recently. It was an incredibly fun experience to talk to locals and negotiate with some of them in order to get information about a murder we were trying to solve (which we failed once. Without getting into the nitty gritty of the conversation and making my comment take an eternity to read; it got pretty brutal. Surprised we managed to beat feet without getting mauled to death.) and of course, solve the mystery imposed upon us!
So, with how recently we started our first short test campaign; It's nothing short of a miracle that this video came out when it did. It was very interesting and quite fascinating to watch. The videos you make are always a treat! You go, sir! I'm certain that this info will help us when we start a bigger campaign.
That's fantastic to hear, I hope it goes well.
To be honest, a lot of my points in the video come from a cynical place. There are a lot of systems in 5e/Pathfinder/etc that are very enticing to new players; things like alignment and classes/archetypes. They appeal to anyone with a history with video games as they can somewhat recognize those systems. I'd definitely suggest experimenting with them if you are new, as it can be fun to make characters based on "I'm going to make a lawful evil paladin" when you are starting out.
From my experience, that method only become a problem after your game group starts to crave stories/adventures with a bit more depth, which is exactly when alignment and "what class am I going to play?" starts to hold you back from thinking about the things that actually affect the longterm health of your game: EX: your party's role play dynamic, which becomes far more appealing to experiment with after you've played a few traditional "we all met in a tavern" style adventures.
Instead of meeting in a tavern, your might start session 1 as a group villainous mercenaries who only work as a team due to their loyalty to their charismatic leader (who is not a DM PC, very important). Games such as WH40K's Rogue Trader sort of force this dynamic by having someone at your table be the captain of the ship who calls all the shots, which isn't a bad starting point for people who want to break away from the standard adventurer group dynamic: AKA a group of murder hobos who all think they are the main character.
We're actually contemplating starting a run of Rogue Trader after our small session has been finished since we're big fans of the intergalactic hell that is Warhammer 40K. I really appreciate the additional advice as well, by the way. I'll be sure to suggest some of this to the boys. Overall, I'd say this video and additional comment have given me a lot of interesting things to think about, and I appreciate that! I'm definitely looking forward to the next play session as DnD has nearly limitless potential. Literally anything is possible as long as you have the imagination to make it happen. Heck, maybe I can get my buds to agree to start a Shin Megami Tensei session. But, that'll probably be a looooooong while from now considering we can typically only get together once every month or so, haha!
By the way, this is perhaps a little off-topic but do you know about the webcomic The Weekly Roll? It's a story of a band of psychopath murderhobos that find themselves in the absolutely most hilarious situations I could possibly imagine. It's an absolute knee slapper and I highly recommend it in case you're looking for something to read.
And once again, thank you very much for the video and this additional comment. Very interesting all around!
@@Mahagion Weird story, but I used to hate WH40K because my neighbour used to talk about it all the time back in high school. He bought me an orc warboss miniature once, and I just had no idea what the fuck it was as it came in pieces, and I didn't know it was a game at all, it just seemed like this very lame thing where you painted little armies.
One of my DM friends essentially tricked me into liking WH40K through Rogue Trader. I had no idea what the universe was about, but I kept throwing out all these fucking oddball ideas that were meant to be dismissive, but he wrote up this character sheet for what was essentially a daemonhost character aboard a Rogue Trader vessel. It was essentially a one shot, but after that we played an actual game once I had the idea of the setting down a little better, and this time I played as the Rogue Trader. That captain + crew dynamic is what I think fully sold me on the idea of tabletop RPGs as a whole, as I had no idea that there were games that would essentially favour one players position over the others, as it seems like something reserved for the dungeon master.
TL;DR: Rogue Trader is probably the reason I still play + give a shit about tabletop games, and now I'm like 40+ books into the Horus Heresy.
@@SwanCC Hahaha! Nice! I don't think I've ever heard of someone getting tricked into liking Warhammer 40K, let alone being a reason why you still play table top games. That's a pretty weird and funny story, indeed.
The main reason I was almost instantly sold on Warhammer 40K is because it's this satire paste of all the clichés one could come up with, amplified in the most gruesome manner imaginable to the point where most stories can't even take themselves seriously. Yet despite that, there's also room for all kinds of tales with surprising amounts of depth. For being a grim dark space world of death and misery, written by some British company to completement their boardgame that might actually murder my wallet one day, it has a lot of potential. It's kind of like the Star Wars I never knew I wanted, but have been hooked on ever since my father introduced me to Blood Bowl.
Tangent aside though, it's pretty cool that you ended up likng Warhammer 40K, though I absolutely understand why some people wouldn't vibe with it. I have a few horror stories about minifigures that were broken in one way or the other because my hands were too jittery, plus painting can be a pain without the right tools, haha!
It was me, I tricked his ass
The last section reminds me so much of my last game group. A lot of descriptions of damage points, no details of combat until we hit zero hitpoints. Plus, one person usually got the glory of the final strike, making everyone else's efforts feel pointless.
As a DM who's been training his players to more ROLEPLAY this game than fight through it, I'm so happy to see someone thinks alike to me. I have a fully homebrewed game and we only use charatcer cheets to bridge the gap between our human ability to accomplish something and the fantasy world.
A situation I find myself in a lot is my players thinking up of ideas, but then looking to ME to see if their characters could EVER think of something similar. Typically, any DM would have you roll, or would punish you for your character being "stupid". But I live by the rule that if you are truly able to think of this YOURSELF, then you are in touch with your own character. When my players feel "trapped" or "unable to do anything" something they feel frustrated, but I reassure them (knowing how they act when they're not in character) that this is not from them, it's from their CHARACTER.
I used to play by the charactersheet dictating my every move for who my characters were. I've abandoned that now, and only use the sheet as a method of raising steaks, or truly testing one's ability, or mettle.
Describing the look of weapons, armour, clothing and facial features is one of my favourite things to do, and at first I thought I wasn't playing this game right! It's so reassuring to see someone cares about the story and roleplay as much as I do. :D keep up the good work, you earned my sub!
I'm of the opinion that DMs that use dice rolls to punish players, or even have it in their head that they need to 'punish' players for poor decision making don't have the right mentality to DM. That's the dungeon crawler "DM vs. Player" paradigm that most people have moved on from at this point. I'd rather play a CRPG and let the computer tell me when I fucked up if that's how the game is going to be run. At least then there is quick saving.
The philosophy behind "What my character is thinking?" Vs. "What am I thinking?" is an interesting one for sure, especially if you've gone out of your way to make a character who is categorically different than you are. I like to think that 'most' of my characters are more competent than I am, so as long as I'm not benefiting from meta/foreknowledge, then I'll assume my character (who is actually experiencing the situation much more vividly than I ever could) can put together the same conclusion.
Doing things 'out of character' can also be very important too, especially if the situation calls for it. If you have a character who hates violence but is thrust into a deadly situation where they and/or their companions might die, then maybe they will pick up a sword and fight? It's out of character, but you can always reflect on that situation afterwards to explore why your character is a pacifist to begin with. Stuff like that is a pretty natural way to lead into talking about your character's backstory as well, as if you've established your hate of violence well enough before hand, then the other characters will likely want to know what it is you are thinking after a moment like that.
@@SwanCC I adore how many ways DM's and players can approch this game. I'm already using some of your points to help shape the way I play and make things a lot more fun for my players. I've never really been a big fan of DM vs Player either, I feel it makes the game a toxic mess of trying to out do the other or send the other into a spiralling headache.
Whilst most of my and my players characters typically stay true to us in a way that isn't really self inserts (more method acting than anything), then I assume that if my character WOULD think of something then it's only fair enough to give them that liberty and assume our PC's are smarter. (though in my campaign's case, we tend to keep what we know and what our PC's can accomplish pretty on par)
Out of charcter moments are some of my favourites and really just help define who they truly are by what forces them to break their boundaries. I've had many of times when I've played in other games where I was punished for my PC doing something I had sworn they wouldn't do. But personally I find it to be wonderfully fun.
Ty for the response dude, thanks for bringing to light some of the more divergent ways of experiencing this awesome tabletop game
this is a very good video man, i usually follow the classes for inspiration for a character and how to build them because i don't get better ideas for them
i'll definitely take what was written to heart for the future
I am so glad to be able to watch/listen to another video of yours :D
Thanks king, appreciate you.
Hi, Shawn. Me again.
I really appreciate your insights recorded in this RUclips electronic video, particularly about broadening your horizons as a DM AND player to the definitions and wordings of the game. While you should respect the skill of professional game developers as other creative minds, players should recognize that not every system is going to meld with the kind of game they want to play.
Personally, I prefer exploration, relationships, high schools, and particularly engaging with supernatural creatures like gods and demons, so naturally we play a game far more rules lite, but I will have to check out Degenesis just as soon as I finish up on Persona 3 Reload.
Goodbye for now, and I'll see you in the next video!
Thanks Greg. Thank you Greg.
The video is grand. I'm mostly trying to engage with systems that are designed to help you avoid those problems.
There's a bunch of systems from various games my group has been stapling onto whatever thing we are playing that month. That Arc System I mention briefly at the end has been the real main stay, but there are also a lot of rules lite systems that have some great ideas. Monster of the Week (a setting for Powered by the Apocalypse) is worth looking into for people interested in mid/high fantasy, and it has some fun ideas on how to get characters talking to each other.
Session zero for my games now involves me pointing a gun at my players and asking them "how do your characters know each other?"; and I better not hear anyone say "we met in a bar." The party dynamic/fun being had at the table increases tenfold when the other characters you are interacting with are: your estranged twin brother who maybe killed your parents, a cracked out conspiracy theorist who trusts you implicitly for some reason, and the ghost who is stuck haunting your group.
@@SwanCC Yeah I had to put up with way too many characters who have to be desperately strung along into becoming a party, I don't mind a causal meeting but I don't want to have to endure the same song and dance again.
I mostly like to play around with pathfinder, but on occasion I play around in other systems - there was that half-finished fallout based my girlfriend fished out of some ancient Google drives that we had a lot of fun with and a fandom specific cyberpunk system that only uses d6s.
And I've been considering making homebrew my own system for the future chance that I finally run a game in my own setting. Though I'm daunted by the prospect of making an entire system from scratch.
@@maelys8851 You can also try adapting a system from one that exists, or chances are someone has done it for you. I'm a fan of really low fantasy, so high level D&D/Pathfinder starts to become a bit of a nightmare. For my own setting I'm working on I am adapting a version of Epic 6 for Pathfinder, which caps the player's levels at 6. EXP is used on feats and other things that add more gameplay options for the players, but doesn't have them casting power word: kill. That way, even when the players are 'max level', if I want to use something like a dragon, there is still that holy fuck moment of: "oh, that's a fucking dragon, we might die."
Also, to your first point. I lost so much hair as a DM trying to find and write new ways to make my players like each other. Session after session of hearing my players offhandedly say things like "why are we even adventuring together?" Now I leave it in the hands of the players themselves and let them figure it out during session zero. It also makes that first session go so much smoother. Instead of the players awkwardly introduce themselves in character to people who kind of already know who they are (because of character creation), they can instead focus on figuring out how those characters interact with one another as they already have some history.
For Part 3, the way to "fix" this is "hit points aren't meat points".
Why do i get the feeling that you got a player that reeeally likes to play bard and constantly tries to unrealistically seduce everything in their sorroundings... again.
Most if not all anecdotes in the video are based on something that's happened to me. I can confirm that in a Storm King's Thunder campaign there was a bard named Ted who was such an insane villain he should have had a red health bar above his head.
man doesn't like classes. k.
I clicked on this video with full intentions of arguing. I do have arguments but I realize they don't matter. In the end of the day, TTRPG are all jumbled messes of barely comprehensible rule sets intended to encourage group story telling. So I just encourage people to play the way they are comfortable but be respectable to the rest of the group. DM included. Also 5th edition is garbage and no one will convince me otherwise.
21:31 Shin Megami Tensei
Wtf