HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 авг 2024
- A pre-order bonus for the D&D 3D VTT has us wondering how close it is and how WotC plan to monetize it? Are the new dragons an upgrade from the old? Wouldn't you like to custom make your character's species?
Playtest Grim Hollow's heritage system: ghostfiregaming.com/GGYT_GHPG...
Email your questions to podcast@ghostfiregaming.com
Ben: @TheBenByrne
Dael: @dailydael
James: @JamesJHaeck
Shawn: @shawnmerwin
Editor: @ZsDante
Topics:
00:00 - Intro
04:29 - Sam Riegel
07:24 - D&D 3D VTT update
20:31 - D&D Preorder bonuses
34:50 - Roll20 data leak
38:11 - 2024 Ennie nominations
41:15 - New heritage system
49:12 - Ranger core fantasy 
Развлечения
When PHB’24 releases I’m waiting for a video on Dael’s channel that is just a 40 minutes rant about Ranger.
I have hope that they will fix it before it goes to print... however unrealistic that is lol. I need hope for the Ranger...
Bat wings are hands, which is why they are in the order chiropter which means "hand wing." The bones in the wing correspond 1 to 1 with the bones in our hands.
I’ve always been drawn to the scout as an archetype. It’s a sneaky wilderness survivalist. To me that’s a ranger. I don’t like them like them inherently as spellcasters and beast masters. I accept that it’s the most commonly held ideal of a ranger and the thing I don’t think any of you mentioned was the influence of World of Warcraft. I think that’s had a huge influence in the last 20 years about people’s expectations of a hunter/ranger that have worked its way into ttrpgs.
I think the WoW ranger (hunter) borrowed thematically from Drizzt with the idea of the pet as battle companion
@@telarr9164 yeah probably but from a popularity perspective I’m sure more people have played WoW then read anything about Drizzt. Those players in WoW are likely a decent percentage of new players who picked up DND in the last ten years. The impression of what a hunter should be is greatly influenced by the game. People just assume ranger must have a pet and use a bow. In the past a ranger could be a competent melee fighter who had survival skills. Aragorn was the obvious inspiration.
I'm so baffled to hear the argument that Geralt doesn't explore the wilds. The man constantly has to roam through the wilderness to harvest materials and track monsters to slay them. Especially in the games you basically are always just wandering off into the woods to find neat stuff.
As one who started back in the white box era I really appreciate Shawn's curmudgeonly commentary. From one grognard to another, le salut! (Bat's forelimbs are wings. The capability of sustained flight is the key. They are defined by their mechanics.)
The real 3D VTT was the friends we made along the way.
RE: Ranger Fantasy: I nominate Batman as the ideal Ranger archetype. I spent a comment last episode on why Ranger and Rouge should be merged, but I will defend its honor here.
Rangers (like Batman) are not as strong as Fighters (say Supes, WW or Flash), so they need to study their opponent and, important to the theme, use the environment to win fights. Rangers should be the first to take advantage of terrain and environmental features, whether those be buildings, trees, or other features found in dangerous locations. A Ranger's spellcasting, like Batman's utility belt, are merely tools for the job when wits are not enough to win the day.
For the Ranger I go back to what inspired the class in the first place for D&D----
Aragorn as Strider/ Rangers of the North/ Rangers of Gondor - They were woodsman who worked in small groups or alone in the wilds to secretly hunt down and stop any threats to civilization, Orcs, Trolls, etc. LOTR books state how they live in the wilds and keep the villages safe without them realizing it. And to a lesser extent Robin Hood (the ambush tactics/ woodland survival parts...... not so much the dashing rogue troupe) These are the Literary inspirations they used.
The Historical inspiration was the Medieval Foresters (Also the inspiration for Tolkien's rangers), Who were outdoorsmen that worked for the various lords during peacetime as game wardens protecting the animals in the kings forest and bounty hunters, hunting down criminals that escaped into the forests, while also hunting down large predators that were threats to the area, and during wartime they acted as lightly armored forward scouts gathering intelligence and resources for the army.
And I would personally add another Historical reference: Rogers Rangers from the French Indian War, the first professional non-conventional warfare troops, who learned to survive in the wilds and "range" for food and supplies, while scouting and deploying camouflage and stealth ambush tactics behind enemy lines.
So in essence the Ranger to me is a lightly equipped highly mobile agile fighter who is an outdoor survivalist that hunts down threats, scouts for intelligence, and uses their wits to utilize, traps, stealth and ambush tactics against threats when needed to exploit their weaknesses (and befriending animals kind of works from the historical game warden role).
I Think they did get kind of overlooked in the newer versions because the wilderness travel aspect of the game is nearly gone, and with all the feats available to anyone they have very little that is special to them, which is why I think they partially merged them with Druids with their nature magic, to try and make them a bit viable and fun still.
Archetypes to base a character on (not all are fantasy characters)-
Aragorn
Robin Hood
Drizzt
Rambo (From First blood)
Geralt - I would put him as a ranger, he does travel through the wilds surviving on his own while hunting the monsters that threaten civilization, scouts and studies them, has knowledge about their weaknesses, has a bond with Roach
Legolas - he is lightly armored compared to other elves in LOTR and does a lot of hunting, scouting and two weapon fighting along with his archery skills
Elyas Machera - From WOT --- Probably a good Archetype for a Beastmaster ranger (Perrin maybe to a lesser extent, but they never really talk about him tracking, hunting etc. like Elyas)
Naru -from the movie Prey - survivalist, hunting, ambush, setting traps (like the older edition rangers) and an animal companion --- When I first watched the movie thought she would make a pretty awesome ranger
The Rangers of the Night's Watch in GOT (The ranger group that scouts the wilds beyond the wall like Jon's Uncle Benjen)
The rebooted Lara Croft from 2013 Tomb Raider game forward - she became more of a survivalist who used stealth, scouting and her wits than the older brash in your face Lara
Daryl Dixon - From The Walking Dead
"Exploit weakness" would probably be my go to core phrase for the ranger fantasy.
agreed. If it wasn' for the huge popularity of LoTR in the late 60s/early70s, we wouldn't have a Ranger class or subclass. The concept has evolved but the reason we have it is Aragorn.
The core fantasy of the Ranger to me is a Wilderness Survivalist, someone who has gotten use to surviving in a wilderness full of extraordinary dangers (cause the wilderness in a fantasy world full of magical creatures and terrible abominations is very dangerous.) Thus:
They are natural skilled hunters (not just of monsters but other creatures)
They should be able to use alchemy and herbalism to give them an edge
They should be able to set up camp literally anywhere and produce makeshift defenses to keep them safe at night.(not just against attackers but also against the elements (wind, rain, etc).
They make friends with animals of the wilds that they aid them in their survival endeavors.
I agree with everything you’ve said. I just wonder if there’s a place for these sorts of rangers at modern tables where the wilderness survival pillar is poorly supported and travel is often hand-waved away. Do you think that the class’s added features, spells, etc. in modern editions are attempts to make it relevant in the age of “heroic fantasy”?
Kinda my thoughts, as well. I see them in game as almost a MacGuyver, adapting their tactics and tools to the environment and enemy. I always disliked the overspecialization the class had on specific terrains and monsters, it kind of goes against the fantasy of an adventuring ranger.
Agreed 👍 ❤
Bats = Fingies and Arms. It's the skin between the fingers and then an additional stretchy bit of skin between the arms and main body. Never looked at bats so closely before. weird but cool.
So glad Sam is recovering and back playing at the table.
24:10 "are a bat's wings arms?"
Come *on* you guys, bats are from the order chiroptera, which literally means "hand wing"... honestly... ;)
12:29 to Dale's point, there will probably be like 2D "tokens" that everyone can use for free, but the fancy 3D Mini's will probably be for sale. Like skins in video game.
I really, really hope that isn't the case but it probably will be
@@biomonkey01 I'm with you
@@RedCoolade In an ideal world, it would be subscription based and profits from subscriptions would be used to develop more minis that would get added over time to your library - like a netflix-type model. But I believe in my heart of hearts it's going to be subscription based with individual miniature purchases on top to maximize profit.
I wonder how many of these tokens will be a red circle with the name of the NPC or monster?
WIzbro doesn’t provide all the materials required to run Roll20 VTT modules, I have zero faith in any digital offering of theirs.
Hey Thanks for the shout out for LGM! I hope I get to see you guys at GenCon this year!
RE: Hunter's Mark as Feature vs Spell: I think WotC is trying too hard to emphasize the Ranger's magical nature that the class feels reliant on it, rather than it just being their exclusive tool. I do agree with people that it should've been a separate feature and not a spell. They should've just ported the similar-in-function Hunter's Quarry from the 4E Ranger.
BORN FROM AN EGG ON A MOUNTAIN TOP, THE FUNKIEST MONKEY THAT EVER POPPED...
I’m looking forward to shouting “bats = fingers” to Ben at GenCon😂. I’m sad that I won’t be there til Thursday afternoon and will miss your publication panel. Have a safe journey to the con all.
I knew James was my favorite 😅. Genasi are so underrated imo. I looovveee playing with them and their themes.
In our playtest of "Khor The World of Many Portals" we have an Earth Genasi Bard. Wesley is really doing a great job!
So I agree!
Regarding the Ranger: the fundamental question is where did you first learn the term “Ranger? For me you’ve got the Texas Rangers (the law enforcement cowboys) and the Lone Ranger (former law enforcement cowboy turned vigilante). The next time I encountered the term was watching the D&D cartoon on Saturday mornings (magic bow means your a Ranger). Finally, in the Crystal Shard, Drizzt, is described as a Ranger. I’d suggest that Drizzt is pretty much identical in his essential nature to the Lone Ranger. They roam the broad expanse of the FRONTIER, hunting outlaws, their motivations and feelings a mystery to those around them. The core fantasy of roaming the frontier, meting out justice requires these mechanics: Exploration bonuses/abilities, hunting/ambushes of enemies bonuses, bonuses or decreased negatives to being outnumbered or outgunned, and the ability to turn the environment into an ally to be used against one’s enemies.
So……yep, the 2014 version of the core Ranger actually NAILED the core Fantasy! (Obviously the mechanics of Tasha’s improvements made the class more fun, but that’s tangential) the problem wasn’t the Ranger class. The problem is how Adventures are written, and how they’re run. Most people play D&D as a war game with cut-scenes.
50:42 I goggled for a solid two minutes at the master expoder after james answered, good on ya Dante.
If Aragorn is my core, I would say the cure fantasy of the ranger is a wilderness survivor, destroyer of threats, and seeker of things. So definitely a monster hunter. But the thing that sets the Dunedain apart from Beowulf and Hercules is that the later were fighters who destroyed monsters, but they were Heroes in the old sense: they sought out the monsters as much for the challenge and the glory as to protect people, and while they might travel to get to their foe, overcoming nature to do so was not usually part of their story. While the Dunedain has to search the wideness, survive what it threw at them, and destroy the evil threat with zero acknowledgement but purely from the motive of protecting people from what Rangers knew was out there but people in general did not, more often then not first seeking out knowledge of that foe's weaknesses before the confrontation because otherwise, they couldn't have won.
So definitely a fighter, not a rogue. They weren't sneaky so much as capable of sneaking when prudent and necessary. I would love if there was some mechanic other than Hunter's Mark +damage to reflect taking down quarry. Maybe the ability to make skill checks utilizing the quarry's environment or previous research to provide advantage, inflict disadvantage/slow, bypass resistances, or impair/negate a lair action. That says knowing weakness to me much more than +1d6 dmg against a marked opponent....
Ah Shawn, as another grizzled veteran stretching back to the Red and Blue books, I am 100% onboard with on the creepiness of gnomes...and yet, there is something there. Also, while I have tried to get up to speed with the modern day game (playing with a group of Millennials for three years has forced me to) there is a small part of me that instinctively reacted to James’ answer as “what the hell’s a Genasi?” 😄
Regarding Drizzt: He is not a ranger in 5E!
According to Chris Perkins, Drizzt is an 8th-level Champion fighter.
A 3E version of Drizzt had him as L10 fighter, five levels in ranger, and one in barbarian.
You have to go back to 2E's Hall of Heroes, where Drizzt was a L10 ranger.
Thus, calling him a quintessential ranger is a bit of a misnomer!
1) Bats have fingers!
2) I think the fantasy of a ranger is totally a hunter/explorer situation. Aragorn tracks the Uruks to rescue Merry and Pippin, but he’s also capable of knocking some heads. I actually think Geralt is a perfect example of a ranger, because he uses his knowledge of monster behaviors to track them down, and his knowledge of their biology to give him an edge through crafting oils and potions for his swords.
I would love to see y'all cover other games besides D&D more!
My hope (regardless of how realistic it is) is that miniatures in the 3D VTT will be tied to the books they appear in. For example, requiring you to purchase the Monster Manual to use the miniatures for all of the monsters within. That said, it seems more likely they'll charge even more for the miniatures... but the optimistic in me hopes it'll just be another advantage of buying digital.
D&D Beyond++, for the free entry leevel of the VTT. D&D Beyond++ Extra for the premium subscription version. D&D Beyond++ Extra Complete for God knows what the next level is.
Double plus good.
Bats = arms with extended fingers connected by membranes to form wings
I was talking about the ranger thing today.
Ranger and Rogue should be a subclass of something I deemed "the scout" but to get a Ranger you go into the direction of a woodman/monster Slayer, and the rogue goes more towards thief/assassin.
And I went on to elaborate on more but I'm sure most people see where I'm going with this.
The scout was a ranger subclass in previous editions and is a rogue subclass in the current edition so this is just extra funny to me.
@@Jasonwolf1495 I'm aware it sounds funny. But the idea is their base mechanics is very similar (normally a Dexterity based mixed martial utility character) but a subclass giving them each a different theme and extra mechanics
So modern gaming is reducing races/species/whatever to cosmetic skins. The new PHB doesn't give me a fantasy adventure vibe - it's the modern world reskinned with a fantasy veneer, and all the races are humans cosplaying as fantasy creatures.
i thought when they were showing off the vtt, the big news was that they had no idea how they were going to monetize it? it felt like at the time that you could buy sets and then use them how you want. id assume like you buy a campaign on roll20. id assume theyd follow that strategy. get basic access, sub for premium features for homebrew, or buy sets. if they really want to go nuts, make a marketplace for people to sell their own stuff
bats = fingers
The ranger is a wilderness rogue. Rogue - city/dungeon Ranger - everywhere else.
Maybe leave certain extra feats tied to Hunter’s Mark be concentration when they are OP, and leave the base HM and basic add ons not concentration?
You guys are awesome! I look forward to this every week. Keep up the fun discussions and never change!
I Love ALL Ghostfire Podcasts videos! 1e Ranger is the best version of the Ranger.
My Core Fantasy of a Ranger is "The Expert of the Wilds"
However, whenever i think about the Ranger design, i always draw comparisons to the Paladin class because they are both half steps.
The paladin, is a cleric with a splash of fighter or vice versa.
The ranger, is a druid with a splash of rogue or vice versa.
When you compare their designs, you can see so many similarities between them.
When I think of rangers I think of Robin Hood. If I were going to create a class based on that archetype, I would list all the cool things about it, and construct the core fantasy from there.
James: "...spike of rock through the geologic record..."
That's called an intrusion!
Drizzt is a hunter ranger with a magic item, not a beast master, although with the 2024 subclasses, I may revisit given the way things have changed in the novel and new phb.
As someone who 3d prints and paints their own miniatures and uses free/1 time purchase map software (foundry vtt/dungeon alchemist) to run my games with, I don't really feel like I have a horse in the race when it comes to the DDB VTT and it's pricing. I just don't really have a place in my hobby space for it.
But I do understand that others are watching this developing issue closely. And I'm not certain what the best way to handle it would be. To put it plainly, you already have to pay for a subscription (at least the DM does), and buy the released books (so your players can build those subclasses). Currently the Maps feature is free to use and it gives you predeveloped maps from adventures you have bought. But I am uncertain if the tokens you get to use in this feature are also representative of the adventures you've bought? If so, and they put a cap on the custom tokens you can upload (to only a certain number of players), then you will be required to at least purchase token packs (which can and will change as more adventures are released).
Now with the 3d virtual table top, which to me is just too much frill for playing in person (my preferred method of playing), will you receive the 3d monsters inherent to each adventure you purchase on the platform (which ends up being a diminishing return since adventures typically do not bring out a full cast of new monsters; typically only a handful amongst the regular antagonist lineup)? If not then I see a handful of collections for 3d monster models (because I feel that one large one would be astronomically priced to the point it would turn many off). And then again, as each adventure releases... they gotta throw together a smaller pack to cover the few extra monsters created for the adventure; would it be cheaper than a more full monster pack?
It's just so up in the air, and while its possible that WoTC themselves do not know how the pricing will work out just yet; I do hope they avoid the stumbles in the past and truly look at the various concerns to choose the RIGHT choice upfront at the start... and not be something that's disjointed and unreasonable, that we can only hope would be fixed over a long period of time.
My Dungeons and Dragons campaign has started to incorporate the Heritage system from Aetherial Expanse. We love the flexibility to create almost anything.
Quintessential Rangers:
Aragorn
Drizzt
Dar, The Beast Master (from the Beast Master movie/series)
I do not like the treatment they have given Hunter's Mark. Not sure why they just couldn't have incorporated and tweaked the MARK action option from the Dungeon Master's Guide. Make it apply to the hunter's next attack or give the hunter a bonus damage die on the hunter's next successful hit against the target. I have not seen that option discussed at all from any sources but it is there.
My best guess is because they have a philosophy that it has to be compatible with the 2014 class.
It feels like that Hunters Mark would have become a Ranger specific feature, but something held them back.
I wanted Hunters Mark to be a feature rather than a spell, but then I saw Divine Smite set as a spell and I gave up hope
The D&D 2024 pre-order of the books and digital saves a US purchaser $60 since the digital costs are reduced from $29.99 to $9.99 (or at least it did. Not sure if that bargain still exists). Sadly those outside the US don't save money on the purchase.
WIzbro is refuses to provide all of the digital materials (ie maps and tokens) required for their VTT modules on Roll20, ergo I have no faith they will provide all the material needed for any other digital product they offer.
I just saw The Tielfling and the Gnome, it was brilliant.
Rangers are the combat expert who honed their skills on the edges of civilization. They have taught themselves how to fight literally anything using specialized knowledge of the enemy. The best modern example of a ranger is Witchers. Its not about them being nature experts necessarily by being best buddies with nature, but more because they are constantly out in the wilds to hunt monsters. Essentially nature is more by coincedence rather than the focus. Their focus is to become experts on monsters and how to kill them.
Many will say that's fighter, but to me fighter is not an expert they are the generalist. They studied how to fight not their enemy. The fighter can swing a sword and will swing that sword at every enemy. The ranger will go "oh this is a vampire I need a stake and some garlic" and change their tactics. The fighter is rigid the ranger is adaptable. In the situation where just swinging a sword is best the fighter will be better, but in matters where deeper tactics can be employed the ranger is king. A ranger and a fighter make a great pair because the ranger creates openings and guides the fighter.
Also as an environmental educator for vertebrates wings and arms are the same thing. All vertebrate wings are arms with a surface that allows for flight. This excludes gliding creatures because their membranes don't allow flight. Insects the wing is a separate limb.
Brave Alice Games 3d VTT is right now in development and imo will be a strong competitor to WoTC.
It's a 3d VTT, you can't make tokens (minis) like you can in roll20, so if they are charging an upfront purchase cost (or even a subscription) a decent amount of base minis should be included. Microtransactions for smaller packs beyond that is "acceptable", probably scummy depending on price but acceptable.
RE: Shawn and Gnomes: And then they made gnomes playable!
"D&D Beyond" stays regular D&D Beyond, and the VTT being beyond D&D Beyond would probably have to be "D&D Transcendant" which honestly would be pretty rad
Bats = wings with benefits
Yeah, I'll be honest - I have no idea what my own definition of Ranger is. For sure Aragorn... but what is that? Because as a character, I think of him more as a Paladin (even narratively he's more like one of Charlemagne's Paladins).
But if we think of it purely from the perspective of the people of Bree etc, he is one of The Rangers - a shady group of untrustworthy outlanders who safeguard the roads and fight wolves and trolls. A fantasy Park/Safari 'Ranger' - deterring poachers, protecting civilians, making sure boundaries are secure... outdoorsy person.
I was onboard with Shawn's dislike of the gnomes until he u-turned and said they were now his favourite. Nooooo!
23:58 Missed opportunity to say, "We leave that to the *philosoraptors*."
Making the theme of the ranger after one guy, is the worst way to define a ranger. Aragorn should fit into the class ranger, but the class of ranger shouldn't be just "Aragorn." Trying to figure out the base of what a ranger should do and using sublcasses to define the way they differentiate towards characters like Aragorn is the way every other class works. Dael nailed it. Never ever define a class based on one guy. It's a bad idea.
I play half-orcs for the same reason Dael plays half-elfs 😅
If it's done fairly we should get all the core minis when we buy a MM like we get all the tokens when we buy a Roll20 MM. That's been the standard. Given they are "giving away" a gold dragon tells me this wont be the case. The approach is, as usual, to bleed us DM's dry. I'm expecting $20 booster boxes of DNDBEYOND minis and when it happens I'm not gonna complain about it cause it's expected.
Bat = Arms
Octopus = 8 Arms
Squid = 2 Tentacles, 8 Arms
Arrr matey. Let's set sail to those digital books in the pirate bay.
+1 to James for the Madness reference
I'd probably say that what I've settled on as the core fantasy of the Ranger is someone that "hunts down dangers". Basically the Archetypal Questing Adventurer. Someone who is equal parts bounty hunter and monster hunter. They find or receive requests to solve some dangerous problem In The Wilds and set out. In a medieval-ish setting this is gonna involve a lot of dealing with untamed nature and being a survivalist, but could take different forms in different settings.
I frequently find myself feeling like the Ranger should have more primacy over the Fighter as a core class archetype, and at the same time shouldnt be treated as incredibly niche and narrow as it frequently is in contrast to the Fighter.
For me the Ranger is and should be in its scope more comparable to the Wizard than the Fighter is. Someone who represents a general archetype of play (martial, spellcaster) but still has an identity distinct from other classes in their archetype.
Ranger really is the class that's been the adventurer all along. Most fighters were soldiers or guards, wizards are scholars, clerics are priests, rangers are the guy who started out adventuring
A lot of fictional/mytholical characters blend across typical class archetypes. Heracles is absolutely some weird barbarian ranger multiclass.
draconic sorcerer? the reason for all the dragon art
hasbro does not care if they are running a casino in their VTT, they made 2 billion dollars in one year on monopoly go (also essentially a casino), and stated that D&D is under monetized
The sciencing of d&d monsters is amazing!
The 3d VTT should be named D&D&D
D cubed?
I think too many species are too much "like Human's, but ..." without actually having different cultures, values, fears, and aspirations.
Example: If a species can only eat meat, their culture will be very different than humans, plant people, or a scavenger folk.
Bats = why not both
I always saw ranger as the bridge between the human world and the wilderness. with the hunter aspect being part of living wild, you hunt food as you live in the places off the path. But destructive threats to the wilderness and threats to towns and villages can also fall to the hunter for their destruction of the place rangers dwell. I do see the ranger being an expert class, favoring bows for fighting, rouge like in some ways, survival skills, a little barbarian and a touch of druid. I think there is a sort of 'ranger is fighter meets druid' idea that has crept in, but the magic aspect never felt like a fit to me. Which is kind of why i think fighter is seen as a good framework, though I'd prefer rogue foundations to be honest.
Bats = Bruce Wayne
Number 1 TTRPG Podcast ❤
I don't really think of Aragorn as a Ranger. I felt like Strider was Aragorn's disguise as "the ranger" but once they reveal he's Aragorn and the lost king of men, they don't call him Strider anymore, and his "build" so to speak is much more a straightforward warrior or even Paladin: Legolas is the ranger archetype as the master of the wilds who can literally walk atop the snow and spy the path from afar.
There are certain classes (Warlock yes, Monk yes, Cleric yes) that --in an RP-heavy setting--do require more heavy lifting for backstory to explain how the character got to where they are. When your whole character's archetype is that you shun civilization and are more at home in the wilds (usually alone), and your DM is running the typical tavern meet-cute or king's bequest.... you should probably have a little sidebar with your DM to make sure that you've got _something_ hooking you into the story.
Everyone loves Thumberchaud
Yes please! Special Ranger episode!
Bats = hands #teamfingies
Bats = fingers.
3:30 shawn is a kobold at heart
Honestly, I’m wondering if Robin Hood and his Merry Men might be another good example of rangers. At least predominantly rangers.
If hunter's mark as a feature and not a spell is your thing, then Tales of the Valiant has that!
Wings = arms. Earth's nature has not yet created a creature with three pairs of limbs, so wyverns are actually more realistic than dragons.
Uhhmmm…. Insects have three pairs of limbs. 🤔
@@TheTerrainWizard yep, caught that after I posted. Should have said that Vertibrates on earth have two sets of limbs. The exoskeleton guys get more creative.
Bats=Fingies
The best part of this comment is RUclips adding "Translate to English" below it. lol.
bats have fingees, obviously!
Id be curious about a special ranger episode.
Codename sigil, just like project octopath traveller and project L, except for some reason they dropped the perfect prototype name.
I don't know if the insulation from the predatory microtransactions is as real as we'd hope.
This is the same company that in Magic the Gathering sells physical lootboxes to children (next set is even centered around cute critters!) and get away with it by pretending there is no inherent value to the cards aside from their rarity.
Bat and wyvern front appendages are Schrödinger's wings...they are both arms and not arms. They are both wings, and not wings
Wings = arms always.
Please tell me that “2024 Revision of the 5e Rulebooks” is a code name, too :( :( :(
I don't think it is at this point.... I really think '5e' is gonna continue and this is just a refresh.
Bats = webbed hands!!!
30:30 Dragon tails, dragon tails, it's now time for dragon tails!
DnD Beyond And Then Some!
Bats=webbed fingers?
On the first topic. I am with Dael. I play human. I prefer to be placed into the fantasy, not be a part of it. If you get my meaning.
Aren't bats one of those creatures that "have arms-that developed wings"? So, both? #TeamWingsOnFingies
Lets go!!!!!!!
Team Wings
Wings are arms #TeamFingies 😂
Ranger as a Rogue subclass!
Bats equal arms, not fingers not wings
gen-con hype
Bats=Fingers, #TeamHands #TeamFingies
Hello my friends, I think you mentioned in a previous video that Grim hollow would be updated for onednd. What about ToV, does it work as is? Thank you.