If my players want to try to seduce another character I have zero issues with that. 1 because they always fail for some reason and 2 I just yada yada it. It works you have a good night end of story.
My best friend and I had a Shadowrun GM that wouldn't kill characters, which would probably have been ok if he wasn't so blatant about it. So we agreed to just try to get killed. We gave up after starting a fight with a dragon and then meleeing it, neither of us being melee specialists or even general combat specialists. His DMPC killed it and then he looked put out that we didn't think he was cool.
I did it as an amateur DM. I was inspired by runesmith's goblin encounter video. Goblin Slayer just got popular at the time so I decided to incorporate the rape to flesh out the goblins. Session became infamous with the group for my use of poison coated daggers nicknamed afterwards as "poopblades".
@@urapooper362 I once put Goblin Slayer in a Pathfinder campaign but without the rape backstory. It turns out that's even worse because that means he genuinely loves killing goblins, and only goblins. He was basically "Krombopulos Michael, The Goblin Slayer".
D&D used to have it as a core concept. Ever wonder where half-orcs come from? The results of survivors from their raiding parties. Over the years this was HEAVILY toned down. They're even suggesting that orcism should be a magical plague, where if you 'survive' you turn into a half-orc, but if you 'die' you become a full orc.
I have a m8 who's been dming for the longest time and he describes running a game as being a car salesman. You want the players to feel special, but you also want to convince them it was their actions that made the session special, not anything the dm may have altered.
A great strategy for making the season feel like it wasn't fudged is by not fudging. If you want to feel special, you can attend kindergarten. The things that happen in the game are the result of the choices you make. No more and no less.
To give some background/context for this guy, he also has done dnd for local children groups etc, so he is used to doing this for sheltered and home schooled children (like himself) So the undead trigger warning makes sense from him
Honestly I can kinda see it. I have a friend who is a real hater of anything gore and the video made it sound as the trigger warning was zombies, not skeletons. It's not something to go overboard but I do think trigger warnings are a good thing, not everyone is on the same wavelength.
sheltered home schooled kids? whose homeachooling them? its the public school kids that turn into sensitive pussies that cant handle criticism or any banter. my cousins were homeschooled hyper competitive and tough as nails.
If D&D 5e content 'triggers' someone, that person absolutely cannot possibly function in human society. They should be hauled away in a straight-jacket, hurled into a padded piss-stinking room, medicated until they drool and soil themselves regularly, fed gruel, and forgotten.
Eh I mean if you have a weak stomach and overactive imagination, I can see it. Like I hate well-done 3D claymation gore and 80s/90s animation gore. You can TELL how gross and chunky they are, the viscera semi-clotting even as the victim bleeds out. VISUALLY it disgusts me. But if somebody is maybe younger or specifically sensitive to gorey imagery and descriptions of rotting corpses, hey, maybe a warning is fine. No downsides to asking if something is okay out of courtesy. It's "cringe" but only because we assume it's fine and didn't think to ask.
@@MarsKarl. that's just it- you're not wrong, but we all know trigger warnings are for histrionic women who want to derail something and make it about their own personal [often fictional] trauma.
@@elijahherstal776 Even if that were true- it's not 2013 or whatever, "trigger" is widely understood to reference a real personal trauma -the real point is the DM asked anyway. Like getting a veggie pizza for someone at the office, instead of all pepperoni. It's not mandatory or unreasonable, it's something that we all should feel comforted by. Very simple acts of service. Important? Not really. Does this kinda stuff make the world a nicer place for us all? Definitely. And the REVERSE is true!! If you know asking somebody about triggers will annoy and irritate them, like your long-term friend group who you KNOW have no issues with gore, NOT asking is equivalent to asking. Same service, just reversed! Ain't complicated.
9:00 My group allows undoing only if you missed something, and did an action that makes no sense. Like attacking an enemy that was already dead, or just any kind of action that is nonsensical in context because the player didn't hear something important.
That's less of an undo and more a "hey you might have missed this detail", no undo needed since 9/10 times it wouldn't have made sense in the 1st place. Undo is a must for when playing in theatre of the mind mode, i.e. no minis/tokens or battlemap, etc. Everyone's imagination is different and _a lot_ of people simply can't spacial imagine worth a lick. The group basically have to point out impossible/invalid/death-wish moves.
@@turkalpha6884I mean just by the nature of theater of the mind, the most minor subtle differences in phrasing and perception can be a gigantic difference in how each player and the DMs sees the situation. And this is even present in written RPGs where you can look at the exact text to reference why you thought something was where it wasn't meant to be
Pippa sounds like she has the right ideas for DMing, and I think she could do well at it. But I fear she's already getting to into her own head about it, and that would probably continue if she started.
@@KeirnothI once through my players into a very hard encounter and halg of them died. They all saif it was way too hard and in response I saif, skill issue.
@@CBman11037 if you threw them into that encounter, then it might have been a skill issue on your part. if however they threw _themselves_ into the encounter then it was entirely their fault
Its also a matter of getting a read on your players on what style of DMing suits them. There is no universally good way to DM. It really depends on how everyone wants to have fun. Naturally I'm going on the assumption that no one is "that guy" from the DM and player ends. Its all compromise, so you're gonna want people that can let stuff go so things move along.
If the numbers don't actually matter at all, then it's just a storytelling improv session. Which can be entertaining with the right people, but shouldn't be a general rule at all, because most people can't pull that off.
good dms are flexible. if you notice your party tends to metagame switch up monster hp for example. if you got new players involved dont throw too hard encounters on them, you can start a fight on the easier side but have some reinforcements or surprises in the backpocket incase they are grasping the game really well and dont have any difficulty dealing with the encounter. and most importantly: if you as a dm and your players dont mesh well together in playstyle just end the campaign instead of resenting each other for game choices. "i dont use any hp" is super cringe tho lol
It depends on the group. There's one group that I dm, doesn't really enjoy combat. So I switched to a time factor system, driving risk and narrative forward. There should be some kind of game system, otherwise it's just rping.
I DM'd a campaign in which one of my players refused to heed advice given. They were liberating some kobold slaves from an encampment and the first few they rescued warned them, in no uncertain terms, that they need to be as stealthy as possible and if they so much as see the Dwarf leading the slavers they are to turn and run. One of the players decided he didn't need the advice and when they reached the final room of the underground encampment, having not seen any trace of the Dwarf they were explicitly warned about, he decided to non-stealth push open the door. The Dwarf in question was right behind it, fully aware of their approach due to the lack of caution and got a surprise round. He hit the intruding party member so hard it instantly killed him. Lessons were learned.
They're TTRPG players, but only play one TTRPG. Let's not pretend 5e is some casual's playground here. If you're using passive perception, Surprise, Flanking, on top of the normal existing combat systems we all automatically assume, 5e is actually pretty grueling to work with. It's super crunchy. It's flexible, sure, but not easy.
D&D isn't easy from a mechanical perspective, but that also doesn't mean that the more recent generation of D&D players know what the fuck they're doing. Tabletop gaming requires actual soft skills that most nerds are frankly not that familiar with. Conflict resolution, mediation, that sort of thing. Most of the newer D&D players don't have these skills and they make the same stupid mistakes that grognards made 40 years ago. It's painful to watch it occur again because WotC is irresponsible with their marketing and doesn't provide anything useful about these soft skills in their rulebooks. Every time I see horrible takes about how to behave at the table, it's from a D&D player. A real "hardcore" or "skilled" tabletop player doesn't know just how to build their character so it can win any encounter. They know how to do that, and not overstate their role in the game so other people can also have fun. Otherwise that "hardcore" player would find himself not being able to play at all because nobody enjoys his presence at the table.
@CrizzyEyes As a newcomer to D&D as of 5e, I've managed to have a number of fantastic experiences with the group I play with, even when I was just learning the ropes. I don't have any of the usual horror stories, in part because we communicated as a group. I feel like sure, there are certain qualities that make for a better D&D player or DM, and sure, Wizards of the Coast could put more effort into giving hints as to how to be better people, but to me that's partly society and partly a learning experience. For players like that, D&D tends to teach them that that kind of attitude doesn't play out well, and as these stories become prevalent cautionary tales in the community, we see less people behaving this way. Still, the community continues to grow, so even as people learn to be good players, even more newbies join in and the larger the fandom, the more you encounter problem players and DM just statistically speaking. It's not that old school D&D was any better or 2nd or 3rd or 4th or 4.5 edition, it's just that the community is larger now.
@@1tylerq127 The stories you're talking about aren't universally agreed upon to be "cautionary tales" any more because the community has grown too fast with no guidance. People simply don't know how to behave any more. You were simply fortunate to get a good group. A great example is a post that DnD Shorts made somewhat recently about a horrendous Reddit thread about D&D. It was about the players' overly relying on Silvery Barbs, a controversial spell. The spell effectively allows a player to say "nuh uh" to a roll that a monster made by forcing the DM to reroll and use the worse result, and then give advantage on the next roll to another ally or themselves. The DM was feeling burnt out about the players' over-use of this spell. The community's reaction was not "talk to their players and let them know they're making the game obnoxious as hell" or even "change the rules of Silvery Barbs," it was "fight fire with fire and abuse Silvery Barbs with your own monsters." These were far and away the highest upvoted posts on that thread. Wow, what a great solution. Now no one gets to have fun as the rug is continuously pulled out from under them when they thought they got a good roll. This is quite possibly the worst way I could imagine to "resolve" this conflict.
This reminds me of the first time I DM'd. Players entered a simple puzzle dungeon after a necromancer. Said necromancer hid behind a door with a nearby lever, of which was weighted. So long as the lever was in place, the door would stay open. So something needed to hold the lever in PLACE or else the door would close on its own. They tested it multiple times to figure it out. Then one genius said "we can just use mage hand to keep the lever in place!" And happily walked through. Mage hand time limit was hit and the lever reset, the door closed. New DM panic ensued as I scrambled to place a lever in the next room so these morons could leave later.
My immediate thought is to let them sit in the dark and watch their supplies run out until another party suddenly busts through the door, days or weeks later. Then maybe have to negotiate sharing the loot for the help. Never a bad thing to remind the party that there's a world besides them.
Hot take = Match your games to your players best you can. That is all. Any more I literally hand pick my players based around the core concept of the game/group.
The 'i think the dm should create the best experience for the party whether they like it or not' really resonated with me Also im blessed with a DM that has similar views on DMing as pippa and god i love being in his games, many good memories have been made
XP to Level 3 is a theater nerd & so are most of his friends. It's why his explanations & advice for GMing or being a player are... to be desired. Also, how he explains his "gigachad DM" just sounds like an ego jerk on how HE plays. Some people like the RP aspect, some people like the combat & the number crunching, some people like world building. Most people like a mixture of everything. Find your style, as a GM and/or as a player, & find a group that vibes with that style. Because that's the fun in it; having a group you vibe with.
Exactly! What makes a good group is a DM and player that agree on what they want. I have had campaigns that were a blast were everyone was a murder-hobo and I've had campaigns were 90% of the time was spent in conversations with NPCs. The key is for everyone (including the DM) to have fun.
I had a DMPC once, as a consequence of the GM dropping out for unexplained reasons and appointing me his replacement since I knew the system the best out of all the players. I put a lot of thought and effort into making him, I didn't want him to just poof out of existence, so I treated him as an NPC for a session. I gave him a good excuse to take his leave, and if the party ever needed a helping hand later on he'd show up as reinforcements. The game died a session later so that never had a chance to happen but I was prepared for it.
My character died in a Tomb of Annihilation game. Made it all the way to Omu. Sadly, once she died, all the other people started playing like dumbasses, like having thier characters just wander off to brood in the middle of the monster infested ruins. The game became a chore and since my new character was trying to be the voice of reason, she was branded as a nag and killjoy.
I think Pippa is off to a great start for being ready to DM. The most important thing of all is to be mindful of your players, what they want to do, and how you can best work with them and their characters. What she needs now is the second most important thing: being ready to screw up. It's going to happen, and that's the best way to learn. Sometimes the mistakes actually improve things for your particular group and you just turn them into house rules because they're more comfortable. Lean into it, and don't be afraid to tell the group when you screwed something up. They're your friends, they'll understand and can help and laugh about it with you. Anyway on the subject of the video she was reacting to, I kinda hate that guy but he's not... completely wrong. I hard disagree about not tracking HP at all, but you should be ready to be a bit flexible with it. If somebody does something cool and the boss has a single digit of HP left, read the room and decide if they should just die there, or maybe they do something unexpected while they're staring death in the face. In a situation where the boss lost all its hit points comically fast, you can just add more health, or maybe you can improvise something based on how suspiciously quickly he went down. Regardless, the most important thing to do when you mess with things is DO NOT TELL THE PLAYERS WHEN YOU DO THIS. EVER. You take that secret to the grave... or share it later when it would be funny to talk about. It all depends on your group and the general mood at the time, and you get better at reading all of that as you DM more and play with your particular group(s).
I make it a mission never to get attached to any character I make in any game. I remember playing with an old social group and it was our first game, my first game ever of Dnd and we made a rule where all our characters had character flaws. I played a teenage druid that grew up in a forest away from civilization so had 0 social skills and a painfully inquisitive mind and within the first hour of our campaign I had an altercation with a party member, a paladin with severe PTSD. I roleplayed and asked him why he spazzed out every time he mentioned his trauma in an effort to console him and learn of his backstory. He turns to the DM and says "I Devine Strike Alurielle." DM stares at him for a bit and goes "Ohhhhh kayyyyy. Are you sure?" He nodded. "Roll an attack." He scored a crit and dealt something absurd like 21 dmg on my frail character who got downed then our only healer waited until i nearly bled out 2 cycles later before rezzing. This was before we even went into one dungeon so was my first combat experience. I made sure that my character defecated in his food and drink any time I could get away with it after that as his character (and player) wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed. Still pissed me off as it was an attempt to out me from the social group but taught me a valuable lesson of how harsh that game and people could be :P Somehow, the thought of DMs holding players hands and negating perma-death pisses me off more.
0:38 That's the first time I've heard her make THAT sound. Wow, she didn't even make that sound while eating the spider. That's how you know they're a bad DM.
I think that will only force your players to focus fire enemies down. Even if you rule out things like stones, they'll all start packing crossbows and up their "to-hit" bonuses each level and taking any ranged feats they can get aaaaaand now you're playing STALKER on master difficulty.
I like most of XP to Level 3's stuff. Thing you need to remember is that at the end of the day TTRPGs are still games you should enjoy and how people enjoy them depends on the person and the group. IIRC he himself DOES track HP, he even said at one point how one of his bad guys got killed in one turn because a player lucked out. What I do in my campaign is track the HP and see how the combat goes. If it's a boss monster and the party is almost wiped out, I don't change the HP and maybe shave off a few if a hit would leave it incredibly low. But if the party smacks the encounter that's supposed to be difficult, then the monster can have some more HP and maybe a new mechanic to make the fight more interesting.
@@theposhdinosaur7276 Not necessarily satire. The whole thing about his "chad" skits is that they're supposed to make other players have as much fun as possible and in this one he decided that the chad DM should prioritize everyone getting some action and having fun.
@@SuperUnnamedplayer Yes satire may not be the right word, but I think this should be looked at the same as the "weakest Brazilian male" meme. It is supposed to be an extreme that you shouldn't necesarily take literally.
Ever since he ended his wizard saga its gotten harder and harder to be able to sit through his vids. Cant remember the last time i saw one of his vids either.
PIppa : "I believe in Rule of Cool..." Player: "Ok just listen up, if we try to produce the explosives with good berries then if we consider their potential calories value we could..." Pippa: "... there is a limit though"
I watch this guy's content fairly regularly. He has some interesting positions, but the HP thing is a terrible take. Rules are there for a reason, as is HP for enemies. It provides context.
That take have me ptsd from a dm who did that and killed my character because he didn't realise how much damage was being thrown around since he didn't track hp. He took a mindflayer that has about 80 go and let it soak 500 damage because nothing really cool happened to kill it
I track HP, but sometimes it is worth just killing the enemy or increasing a bit of HP. Something that is also fun to do is giving last resource so the players can feel a bit of panic, even if the fight was easy.
If I did something smart or cool to try and shave a good chunk of HP off the boss early on the fight/before the fight starts and then the dm tells me the boss will die only when something cool happens regardless of me, I would just get pissed and stop trying.
Every D&D channel occasionally posts incredibly stupid opinions. It comes with the game unfortunately. I would say XP to Level 3 is slightly more frequent than most in his dumb takes though. The "no HP" DMs suffer from severe shortsightedness. They had one single boss fight where the players critted him down in one round and thought "wow that was lame I'm never letting that happen again." In my experience, the players will laugh about a fight like that for years afterward. Not everything has to be an *EPIC CINEMATIC MOMENT.* Otherwise the actual epic cinematic moments that emerge from the mechanics organically won't have any significance.
People who only watched Jacob's skits and never seen his actual games he's run keep coming to his skits for guidance and I'm so tired of seeing it at the table.
I think the best way for Pippa to learn about DMing would be for her to do a couple one shots with the people who want to play before doing a long campaign so she can figure out how the other girls want to play
Having an actual session 0 also helps a lot with it. I always like to ask what they hope to see, what they'd like to avoid (triggers basically) etc. You don't have to adhere to a playstyle or anything. You can always fix things mid journey
I've had some 'bad' (?) GM's over the years. One ran an 'introductory' adventure for 3 new players. 3 lv 1 characters... 1st monster was a Cr 6 golem. Just one-shotted everyone. Another one had a player character outright kill another because they fumbled a range attack. Great fun for the guy who was given no chance to act, just went from full health to dead with no chance to save themselves.
Content warnings shouldnt be needed if youre dming for friends. In a public game for strangers it might be helpful but if you know the people the dm should be able to figure it out
@@ErrantPathfinder some of the public games are expected to be an absolute introductory experience suitable even for children. Any game run for normal adults id agree though
This. It’s one thing if you’re DMing people you don’t really know. W/ friends? You should know each other’s humor and what buttons to push and not push. Zero reason for content warnings w/ people you know
@@jeice13you are a dufus, should they put out a trigger warning before the hydras teeth scene in Jason and the Argonauts despite being pretty obviously designed with a larg proportion being choldrenA?
@@ErrantPathfinder sorry buddy I'm not here for your in-depth furry ERP session. "content warnings" is just a gay political rephrasing of the same page exercise, something competent tabletop groups have practiced for years
the fun thing with dnd is that different people like to play it differently and want different things out of it, and they can totally do that. Its all about communication and finding the right players and dm for you. The gigchad dm is an extreme caricature of one end, but a lot of people like a dm that is flexible, and as long as they dont see behind the curtain fudging some numbers can help with things like the pacing or narrative of the game. Other people prefer something more strict and challenging, where they feel the tension that things could go wrong any moment. Since the game is run by a person instead of a computer, people can play what ever version of the game they want and thats what makes it so cool
My group adds in some houserules just out of convenience. Like for initiative, we just have one person roll against one of the monsters, and either we all go at once or the monsters all go at once, just so everyone can make their moves without anyone waiting for anyone else. And we are usually very lazy so the DM will just tell us when we level instead of everyone needing to track experience. But yes some of the things in this seemed rather silly. Thank you friend.
I've had a lot of success having DMPCs who are capable noobs, where the PCs get to be the cool capable people who show the DMPC around. They can still be there when you need them to adjust things or highlight plot points or introduce ideas or whatever.
I'm usually the DM, but if I get to be a player and play a warlock or something, at the end of the session, after agonising over when and where to use my spell slots effectively and I find out it's literally irrelevant because shit dies on a whim, amma introduce the DM to the concept of having 0HP personally. Edit: also really goofy boss deaths to piss-weak attacks or goofy situations are funny and memorable yet get overlooked and forgotten if the DM is looking for a cinematic death. I hate the term rail-roading because people mis/overuse it but not using hitpoints is essentially the combat equivalent imho.
Ah, the 5e 'Tourist Takes' on how to make D&D games 'better'. The only reason I don't find them more repulsive is because it's not like 5e is asking for you to abide by its own rules and mechanics. Now it's all about people sitting around the table and doing pretendy-time with some notional dice rolls. I'll even say something controversial: As busted as the Dark Souls tabletop RPG was, it at least took 5e's ruleset and made it an actual GAME and didn't pull its punches. Nu-D&D is just a lifestyle brand with a half-assed tabletop game ruleset written by board gamers.
@@WeWillAlwaysHaveVALIS I prefer my RPG's to have rules more complex than a board game for children. But if I'm a part of a 'superiority gang', it's "The only thing worse than fifth is fourth" crew. And I'm objectively correct. And here's the thing: Fourth Edition should have just been boxed up and turned into a board game.
I completely understand Pippa's murderous anger at this. Those people commenting under the video agreeing with that idiocy should be rounded up, locked in a barn with the rest of their kind, and set a nice cleansing fire to that we may improve our stock. The gene pool needs some chlorine.
I don't do much of anything with DnD, but I'll never forget what these streamers I used to watch did. They took turns trying to pocket gold left on a table, they all failed, and then the last one took his turn. The half-orc man rolled a Nat 20. DM: "Holy shit.... ok, well you not only pocketed the gold, you pocketed the table."
Playing a role-playing game without any risk or consequence, with everything padded for comfort...I'd rather just read a children's book. Get about the same out of it.
What Pippa needs to realize is that people sometimes don't realize they don't want what they say they want, they lie to themselves. Pippa needs to just figure out what she wants from DnD, communicate that idea to her group, and play that. She can't choose to satisfy everyone, she should focus on the game she, and her group wants to play. Edit: She should look into OSR, it matches her values quite a bit.
He has pretty bad takes, especially about how 'broken' Wizards are. If memory serves the majority of the spells he complained about weren't even in the Wizard's spell list, Silence and Heat metal. Like yeah Wizard's are a bit imbalanced, but that's true for all primary casters. Bards are by far the most broken class in 5th.It's just lazy rehashing of complaints of 3.X editions.
I don't know about anyone else, but, hypothetically, if a bunch of weirdo, murderhobos, walked in to my shop and, for example, one lifted an anvil, barehanded, and told me he would drop it on me, unless he got a discount, I would be thoroughly intimidated by the lifting action by itself. So a Stat roll, any stat, for "intimidation" is totally valid.
Sometimes DMPCs are necessary. The game i'm in with my friends started as a fast oneshot with 1 player and dmpc to teach him how the game works. Then I joined and the party had three martials and thus a spellcaster was required so a second dmpc was needed. Then we realized we had no healing so a third dmpc was added.
Yeah I usually agree with Jacob's approach to the game, but that take about undoing turns and not tracking hit points, plus all the people agreeing with it in the comments always bugged me. Like I can understand fudging hit points on enemies when you're learning to DM and you fucked up the encounter balance and you've accidentally made a fight way too easy, or way too hard. But just outright not tracking it and waiting for everyone to do something cool just seems really lame to me. If I found out my DM did this, it'd immediately kill almost all my enjoyment for the game, and if I told my players I did that, I'm sure they'd feel the same way. For anyone who's considered doing that style of play, I'd advise you to reconsider for 2 main reasons: - It invalidates player choice. for example, a player might choose to use a big greatsword instead of a longsword and shield, basically trading off their defense for more damage. But if the DM isn't tracking hp, then damage doesn't actually matter, so they player's choice to be better at dealing damage is also meaningless. - And lastly, but most importantly, if a player's character happens to die in combat, it's no longer their own fault, or the fault of the dice (bad luck). It becomes entirely the fault of the DM, since they chose not to run the game in a fair way. Player choice in combat doesn't matter, the dice don't matter, the only deciding factor is how long the DM decides the fight will go for, and if a PC ends up dead because a fight went on for a bit too long, then they've effectively just chosen to kill off that PC, and there's nothing the player could have done to prevent this. That said, I assume any DM that actually runs this style of game, would just asspull a resurrection on the dead PC out of nowhere, that way even the stakes are meaningless. For any aspiring DM's out there, I'd suggest checking out Matt Colville, he has a bunch of videos with DMing advice, but it's also a lot of content to go through. I think the best way to learn DMing is to just jump into it with a group of friends and give it a go. Either run a premade adventure, or just make something up and run the game you want to run, don't try to emulate another DMs style like Matt Mercer, just run your own game. Try out different ideas, keep what works, discard what doesn't, and understand that you're going to make mistakes, but as long as you can learn from those mistakes, then you'll eventually become a good DM.
That bit about not tracking HP sounds good to a casual audience on paper, but anyone experienced on either the player or DM side who thinks about it for a minute realizes how awful an idea it is.
The worst part about this is that he was being cheeky; he doesn't actually do this in his games. But the people who watch his videos will unironically agree with it, which shows you the weird place the D&D community is at now.
I'm in agreement, death should and consequences should always be a part of the game. Not something that's always at the back of their necks but something that's waiting in the wings ready to swoop in if everything falls apart. I've lost characters, seen characters die and killed them as the DM.
It feels good to see someone both praise and criticize Jacob. There are plenty of things that I like to hear, but other things are stupid. Like he thinks 'protection' is an awful fighting style and stands by it.
The most important guideline for dnd is about making sure people have fun. Remember the golden rule of DMing. As the DM, you have final say on what the rules are even if it contradicts what is said in rulebooks. What rules to use and follow is up to your discretion but remember that you need to make sure the rules are fair and challenging enough to allow people have enough fun so they return next session.
This advice can be a honeytrap sometimes because incompetent DMs prioritize short-term fun over the long-term. If you give your players powerful magic items for example, it will seem fun to them in the moment but it may destabilize your whole campaign. All the encounters you have planned or will plan likely won't be fun because the players are now too powerful.
Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game. In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
I can't tell if he is joking or not, the cringe is so intense you'd think it has to be a joke, but ppl really do be like this Can't handle how Backpfeifengesicht he is, why does he keep looking at the camera like that
Here's the thing: every DM has their way of how they want to run their table and every player has a way they want to play. The only ways to really know whether you'll mesh is to try. Pippa's opinion on how a game should be run isn't the same as the guy behind 3XP, and that's fine. Variety is the spice of life.
All TTRPGs are absorbing this new bullshit culture now. I'm not gonna waste time learning a new system that I'll never get to play with actually cool people.
I agree with Pippa in most things. I would rather have my players keep their character because they become attached to it, it's just a natural human trait. I don't go out of my way to KEEP their character alive, but balance the challenges so that they take responsibility if they DO die.
I am a new DnD player. Started around the time 5e launched. I understand the old guard who hated 5e, because seeing how the people play who came in when it blew up in mainstream annoys the absolute hell out of me. I am luckily blessed with a DM who painstakingly tries to give us a challenge, and not just kills the BBEG when he thinks it's cool.
80% of it is on the DM but that last 20% will make or break any campaign: player participation. As a DM, I'd rather have a passionate min/maxer, obtuse MC-and-his-handlers, or amateur theatre-major. There's plenty of material to build stuff on with all of those.... as oppose to the ones who just do nothing even when a couple of clue-by-fours clonks them on the noggin.
my paladin friend unironically rolled a nat 20 to seduce a green dragon when i was dming. when i'm not dming, i just consistently roll at least 5 nat 1s and we usually play with crit fail so yea. loaded dice i swear.
Reminder that you're only supposed to roll dice when the _outcome is uncertain._ That means there has to be a reasonable chance of success. While dragons have been known to polymorph into humans to mate sometimes, this seems pretty far fetched without the use of magic
I don't like the not counting HP part too, that pretty much take the G out of the RPG, but I think undoing is sometimes fine depending on the context. Like if a player ran out of spells or somebody already used up something and they says they're using those, I wouldn't be like "Sorry, but your action failed so your turn is skipped". But if they got a bad roll and failed their attack or something like that, I wouldn't allows. And Pippa got that right about the turn thing: It can be interpreted as an asshole move if you skip somebody turns simply because they're taking too long. Sometimes people can't think quick enough, lacks the ability to plan ahead, or is simply new to the whole thing, or bad at math, or they're just want to be really thorough. You can't put skill check in real life to gatekeep someone from doing something for fun, or they'll just quit and go do something else. I'd think the DM have a problem with me if he/she do that to me and I would just quietly quit because I wouldn't play with people that have problems with me. Beside that's kinda metagaming. A player being slow in deciding what they'd do is not connected to how quick their characters would think/act because that should be depending on their stats.
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
"You seduce the dragon. It now considers you as a part of its hoard. It is preventing you from leaving."
[Envode An Starts playing.]
Shivering Touch.
If my players want to try to seduce another character I have zero issues with that. 1 because they always fail for some reason and 2 I just yada yada it. It works you have a good night end of story.
Pippa is getting Gaslit so hard, that she is unsure if she is actually getting gaslit.
"My dm would never let my character die."
I've killed enough PCs to be brought up for war crimes. And my players thank me for it.
My best friend and I had a Shadowrun GM that wouldn't kill characters, which would probably have been ok if he wasn't so blatant about it. So we agreed to just try to get killed. We gave up after starting a fight with a dragon and then meleeing it, neither of us being melee specialists or even general combat specialists. His DMPC killed it and then he looked put out that we didn't think he was cool.
3:03 "i dont understand why people are doing romances between characters" they watched Critical Roll
'Some people put rape in their D&D"
Goblin Slayer had entered the chat.
Cultured capipi
I did it as an amateur DM. I was inspired by runesmith's goblin encounter video. Goblin Slayer just got popular at the time so I decided to incorporate the rape to flesh out the goblins. Session became infamous with the group for my use of poison coated daggers nicknamed afterwards as "poopblades".
@@urapooper362 I once put Goblin Slayer in a Pathfinder campaign but without the rape backstory. It turns out that's even worse because that means he genuinely loves killing goblins, and only goblins. He was basically "Krombopulos Michael, The Goblin Slayer".
Roll for anal circumference
D&D used to have it as a core concept.
Ever wonder where half-orcs come from? The results of survivors from their raiding parties.
Over the years this was HEAVILY toned down. They're even suggesting that orcism should be a magical plague, where if you 'survive' you turn into a half-orc, but if you 'die' you become a full orc.
I have a m8 who's been dming for the longest time and he describes running a game as being a car salesman. You want the players to feel special, but you also want to convince them it was their actions that made the session special, not anything the dm may have altered.
A great strategy for making the season feel like it wasn't fudged is by not fudging.
If you want to feel special, you can attend kindergarten. The things that happen in the game are the result of the choices you make. No more and no less.
Pippa: THIS IS DND! THERE ARE RULES! MARK IT ZERO!
*Pulls out the 9mm pipgun*
YOU THINK IM FUCKING AROUND HERE? MARK IT ZERO
To give some background/context for this guy, he also has done dnd for local children groups etc, so he is used to doing this for sheltered and home schooled children (like himself)
So the undead trigger warning makes sense from him
Honestly I can kinda see it. I have a friend who is a real hater of anything gore and the video made it sound as the trigger warning was zombies, not skeletons. It's not something to go overboard but I do think trigger warnings are a good thing, not everyone is on the same wavelength.
Yo... that's pretty neat! =)
🎉OH well thats fine
I give 0 fucks he still is terrible
sheltered home schooled kids? whose homeachooling them?
its the public school kids that turn into sensitive pussies that cant handle criticism or any banter.
my cousins were homeschooled hyper competitive and tough as nails.
Trigger warnings for undead? What, does the CCP play at his table?
He hates Trump and is a Bernie Bro
If D&D 5e content 'triggers' someone, that person absolutely cannot possibly function in human society. They should be hauled away in a straight-jacket, hurled into a padded piss-stinking room, medicated until they drool and soil themselves regularly, fed gruel, and forgotten.
Eh I mean if you have a weak stomach and overactive imagination, I can see it. Like I hate well-done 3D claymation gore and 80s/90s animation gore. You can TELL how gross and chunky they are, the viscera semi-clotting even as the victim bleeds out.
VISUALLY it disgusts me. But if somebody is maybe younger or specifically sensitive to gorey imagery and descriptions of rotting corpses, hey, maybe a warning is fine.
No downsides to asking if something is okay out of courtesy. It's "cringe" but only because we assume it's fine and didn't think to ask.
@@MarsKarl. that's just it- you're not wrong, but we all know trigger warnings are for histrionic women who want to derail something and make it about their own personal [often fictional] trauma.
@@elijahherstal776 Even if that were true- it's not 2013 or whatever, "trigger" is widely understood to reference a real personal trauma -the real point is the DM asked anyway. Like getting a veggie pizza for someone at the office, instead of all pepperoni. It's not mandatory or unreasonable, it's something that we all should feel comforted by. Very simple acts of service.
Important? Not really. Does this kinda stuff make the world a nicer place for us all? Definitely.
And the REVERSE is true!! If you know asking somebody about triggers will annoy and irritate them, like your long-term friend group who you KNOW have no issues with gore, NOT asking is equivalent to asking. Same service, just reversed! Ain't complicated.
Maybe he gave the skeleton warning because he's DMing in the People's Republic.
9:00 My group allows undoing only if you missed something, and did an action that makes no sense. Like attacking an enemy that was already dead, or just any kind of action that is nonsensical in context because the player didn't hear something important.
That's less of an undo and more a "hey you might have missed this detail", no undo needed since 9/10 times it wouldn't have made sense in the 1st place.
Undo is a must for when playing in theatre of the mind mode, i.e. no minis/tokens or battlemap, etc. Everyone's imagination is different and _a lot_ of people simply can't spacial imagine worth a lick. The group basically have to point out impossible/invalid/death-wish moves.
@@turkalpha6884I mean just by the nature of theater of the mind, the most minor subtle differences in phrasing and perception can be a gigantic difference in how each player and the DMs sees the situation.
And this is even present in written RPGs where you can look at the exact text to reference why you thought something was where it wasn't meant to be
Pippa complaining about taking the Game out of the Role-playing game
Poor Pippers.
Would gladly die from her high challenge rating random encounter out of nowhere any day.
I would rather die in Pip's 5E meatgrinder than playing in some failed theater kid's soap opera play.
"I roll to seduce the dragon!"
_nat 20_
"Okay. The dragon stares at you and only you as it's three meter dong begins to inflate."
"..."
“Make a constitution saving throw”
Pippa sounds like she has the right ideas for DMing, and I think she could do well at it. But I fear she's already getting to into her own head about it, and that would probably continue if she started.
Yeah. DMing requires you to make decisions and DONT SECOND GUESS yourself and Pippa isn't good at that lol
@@KeirnothI once through my players into a very hard encounter and halg of them died. They all saif it was way too hard and in response I saif, skill issue.
@@CBman11037 if you threw them into that encounter, then it might have been a skill issue on your part. if however they threw _themselves_ into the encounter then it was entirely their fault
who else's head should she get into?
Its also a matter of getting a read on your players on what style of DMing suits them. There is no universally good way to DM.
It really depends on how everyone wants to have fun.
Naturally I'm going on the assumption that no one is "that guy" from the DM and player ends. Its all compromise, so you're gonna want people that can let stuff go so things move along.
Running pathfinder has taught me that half my players can't read so definitely checking their stuff now.
1e or 2e? 1e without reading sounds like the worst pit of hell.
If the numbers don't actually matter at all, then it's just a storytelling improv session. Which can be entertaining with the right people, but shouldn't be a general rule at all, because most people can't pull that off.
good dms are flexible. if you notice your party tends to metagame switch up monster hp for example. if you got new players involved dont throw too hard encounters on them, you can start a fight on the easier side but have some reinforcements or surprises in the backpocket incase they are grasping the game really well and dont have any difficulty dealing with the encounter.
and most importantly: if you as a dm and your players dont mesh well together in playstyle just end the campaign instead of resenting each other for game choices.
"i dont use any hp" is super cringe tho lol
Yeah, balancing the encounter on the fly is a must have skill to learn for any DM who's handling any TRPG with combat mechanics.
Saying "i dont use any hp" to players is equivalent to: you were going to win anyways, it didn't matter.
Queue Twilight Zone gambling hell episode.
It depends on the group. There's one group that I dm, doesn't really enjoy combat. So I switched to a time factor system, driving risk and narrative forward.
There should be some kind of game system, otherwise it's just rping.
Only if the party really values HP tracking. If they value drama and tension, strict HP values aren't useful, they can be a huge hindrance.
@@johntan4997 How does this time factor system work? Sound interesting.
I DM'd a campaign in which one of my players refused to heed advice given. They were liberating some kobold slaves from an encampment and the first few they rescued warned them, in no uncertain terms, that they need to be as stealthy as possible and if they so much as see the Dwarf leading the slavers they are to turn and run.
One of the players decided he didn't need the advice and when they reached the final room of the underground encampment, having not seen any trace of the Dwarf they were explicitly warned about, he decided to non-stealth push open the door.
The Dwarf in question was right behind it, fully aware of their approach due to the lack of caution and got a surprise round. He hit the intruding party member so hard it instantly killed him.
Lessons were learned.
“I retreat to the cannon in my office loaded with grapeshot”
Pippa is losing her mind learning that most 5e players, or ones who joined during 5e, aren't actually TTRPG players
They're TTRPG players, but only play one TTRPG. Let's not pretend 5e is some casual's playground here. If you're using passive perception, Surprise, Flanking, on top of the normal existing combat systems we all automatically assume, 5e is actually pretty grueling to work with. It's super crunchy.
It's flexible, sure, but not easy.
D&D isn't easy from a mechanical perspective, but that also doesn't mean that the more recent generation of D&D players know what the fuck they're doing. Tabletop gaming requires actual soft skills that most nerds are frankly not that familiar with. Conflict resolution, mediation, that sort of thing. Most of the newer D&D players don't have these skills and they make the same stupid mistakes that grognards made 40 years ago. It's painful to watch it occur again because WotC is irresponsible with their marketing and doesn't provide anything useful about these soft skills in their rulebooks. Every time I see horrible takes about how to behave at the table, it's from a D&D player.
A real "hardcore" or "skilled" tabletop player doesn't know just how to build their character so it can win any encounter. They know how to do that, and not overstate their role in the game so other people can also have fun. Otherwise that "hardcore" player would find himself not being able to play at all because nobody enjoys his presence at the table.
@CrizzyEyes As a newcomer to D&D as of 5e, I've managed to have a number of fantastic experiences with the group I play with, even when I was just learning the ropes. I don't have any of the usual horror stories, in part because we communicated as a group.
I feel like sure, there are certain qualities that make for a better D&D player or DM, and sure, Wizards of the Coast could put more effort into giving hints as to how to be better people, but to me that's partly society and partly a learning experience. For players like that, D&D tends to teach them that that kind of attitude doesn't play out well, and as these stories become prevalent cautionary tales in the community, we see less people behaving this way. Still, the community continues to grow, so even as people learn to be good players, even more newbies join in and the larger the fandom, the more you encounter problem players and DM just statistically speaking.
It's not that old school D&D was any better or 2nd or 3rd or 4th or 4.5 edition, it's just that the community is larger now.
@@1tylerq127 The stories you're talking about aren't universally agreed upon to be "cautionary tales" any more because the community has grown too fast with no guidance. People simply don't know how to behave any more. You were simply fortunate to get a good group.
A great example is a post that DnD Shorts made somewhat recently about a horrendous Reddit thread about D&D. It was about the players' overly relying on Silvery Barbs, a controversial spell. The spell effectively allows a player to say "nuh uh" to a roll that a monster made by forcing the DM to reroll and use the worse result, and then give advantage on the next roll to another ally or themselves. The DM was feeling burnt out about the players' over-use of this spell.
The community's reaction was not "talk to their players and let them know they're making the game obnoxious as hell" or even "change the rules of Silvery Barbs," it was "fight fire with fire and abuse Silvery Barbs with your own monsters." These were far and away the highest upvoted posts on that thread. Wow, what a great solution. Now no one gets to have fun as the rug is continuously pulled out from under them when they thought they got a good roll. This is quite possibly the worst way I could imagine to "resolve" this conflict.
@@MarsKarl.It's casual fodder tho. It's critical role and the movie dragging in lazy and over sensitive people into the hobby
This reminds me of the first time I DM'd.
Players entered a simple puzzle dungeon after a necromancer. Said necromancer hid behind a door with a nearby lever, of which was weighted. So long as the lever was in place, the door would stay open. So something needed to hold the lever in PLACE or else the door would close on its own. They tested it multiple times to figure it out. Then one genius said "we can just use mage hand to keep the lever in place!" And happily walked through.
Mage hand time limit was hit and the lever reset, the door closed.
New DM panic ensued as I scrambled to place a lever in the next room so these morons could leave later.
My immediate thought is to let them sit in the dark and watch their supplies run out until another party suddenly busts through the door, days or weeks later. Then maybe have to negotiate sharing the loot for the help. Never a bad thing to remind the party that there's a world besides them.
@@Aralaas *knock knock knock* "Housekeeping!"
Hot take = Match your games to your players best you can. That is all.
Any more I literally hand pick my players based around the core concept of the game/group.
The 'i think the dm should create the best experience for the party whether they like it or not' really resonated with me
Also im blessed with a DM that has similar views on DMing as pippa and god i love being in his games, many good memories have been made
"Dungeons & Dragons and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race"
I can literally feel his politics
XP to Level 3 is a theater nerd & so are most of his friends. It's why his explanations & advice for GMing or being a player are... to be desired.
Also, how he explains his "gigachad DM" just sounds like an ego jerk on how HE plays.
Some people like the RP aspect, some people like the combat & the number crunching, some people like world building. Most people like a mixture of everything. Find your style, as a GM and/or as a player, & find a group that vibes with that style. Because that's the fun in it; having a group you vibe with.
Exactly! What makes a good group is a DM and player that agree on what they want. I have had campaigns that were a blast were everyone was a murder-hobo and I've had campaigns were 90% of the time was spent in conversations with NPCs. The key is for everyone (including the DM) to have fun.
This is all the result of the theater kidification of DnD
This is what an unkept gate allows in.
Never again...
the jews did this
holy shit chat was so divided at the 'lich has no hp' part lmaoo
I had a DMPC once, as a consequence of the GM dropping out for unexplained reasons and appointing me his replacement since I knew the system the best out of all the players. I put a lot of thought and effort into making him, I didn't want him to just poof out of existence, so I treated him as an NPC for a session. I gave him a good excuse to take his leave, and if the party ever needed a helping hand later on he'd show up as reinforcements. The game died a session later so that never had a chance to happen but I was prepared for it.
I have had a DMPC too. The fuckers refused to even enter a room unless he took the lead. And he was a sorcerer!
I feel like playing dnd with Pippa would be a terrifying experience
Pippa sounds like she knows what a good D&D game looks like, to be honest.
You seduced the dragon.
Roll fortitude check for half damage.
"I don't trust people." Pippa, 2023.
Well said Pippa, well said.
As a Tabletop fan of over ten years; I AGREE WITH PIPPA! Some people make D&D unfun to play with that cringe ass shit
Rule of fun is THE rule that should never be overlooked
I fucking love dying, it doesn’t even have to be a sacrifice for the group
I love making characters, but I don’t purposely kill myself
My character died in a Tomb of Annihilation game. Made it all the way to Omu. Sadly, once she died, all the other people started playing like dumbasses, like having thier characters just wander off to brood in the middle of the monster infested ruins. The game became a chore and since my new character was trying to be the voice of reason, she was branded as a nag and killjoy.
I think Pippa is off to a great start for being ready to DM. The most important thing of all is to be mindful of your players, what they want to do, and how you can best work with them and their characters. What she needs now is the second most important thing: being ready to screw up. It's going to happen, and that's the best way to learn. Sometimes the mistakes actually improve things for your particular group and you just turn them into house rules because they're more comfortable. Lean into it, and don't be afraid to tell the group when you screwed something up. They're your friends, they'll understand and can help and laugh about it with you.
Anyway on the subject of the video she was reacting to, I kinda hate that guy but he's not... completely wrong. I hard disagree about not tracking HP at all, but you should be ready to be a bit flexible with it. If somebody does something cool and the boss has a single digit of HP left, read the room and decide if they should just die there, or maybe they do something unexpected while they're staring death in the face. In a situation where the boss lost all its hit points comically fast, you can just add more health, or maybe you can improvise something based on how suspiciously quickly he went down.
Regardless, the most important thing to do when you mess with things is DO NOT TELL THE PLAYERS WHEN YOU DO THIS. EVER. You take that secret to the grave... or share it later when it would be funny to talk about. It all depends on your group and the general mood at the time, and you get better at reading all of that as you DM more and play with your particular group(s).
I make it a mission never to get attached to any character I make in any game. I remember playing with an old social group and it was our first game, my first game ever of Dnd and we made a rule where all our characters had character flaws. I played a teenage druid that grew up in a forest away from civilization so had 0 social skills and a painfully inquisitive mind and within the first hour of our campaign I had an altercation with a party member, a paladin with severe PTSD. I roleplayed and asked him why he spazzed out every time he mentioned his trauma in an effort to console him and learn of his backstory. He turns to the DM and says "I Devine Strike Alurielle." DM stares at him for a bit and goes "Ohhhhh kayyyyy. Are you sure?" He nodded. "Roll an attack." He scored a crit and dealt something absurd like 21 dmg on my frail character who got downed then our only healer waited until i nearly bled out 2 cycles later before rezzing. This was before we even went into one dungeon so was my first combat experience. I made sure that my character defecated in his food and drink any time I could get away with it after that as his character (and player) wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed. Still pissed me off as it was an attempt to out me from the social group but taught me a valuable lesson of how harsh that game and people could be :P Somehow, the thought of DMs holding players hands and negating perma-death pisses me off more.
0:38
That's the first time I've heard her make THAT sound.
Wow, she didn't even make that sound while eating the spider. That's how you know they're a bad DM.
Be me.
Remove hit points.
Just make any hit fatal.
For both players and monsters.
Suddenly everyone wants to be very careful, specially with traps.
That's actually a pretty cool spin on it tbf
congratulations, you don't understand how the game works
@@mrosskneNah, they've just gone to early game 1e and 2e
I think that will only force your players to focus fire enemies down. Even if you rule out things like stones, they'll all start packing crossbows and up their "to-hit" bonuses each level and taking any ranged feats they can get aaaaaand now you're playing STALKER on master difficulty.
I like most of XP to Level 3's stuff. Thing you need to remember is that at the end of the day TTRPGs are still games you should enjoy and how people enjoy them depends on the person and the group. IIRC he himself DOES track HP, he even said at one point how one of his bad guys got killed in one turn because a player lucked out. What I do in my campaign is track the HP and see how the combat goes. If it's a boss monster and the party is almost wiped out, I don't change the HP and maybe shave off a few if a hit would leave it incredibly low. But if the party smacks the encounter that's supposed to be difficult, then the monster can have some more HP and maybe a new mechanic to make the fight more interesting.
Yeah. I like most of his stuff too. But Pippa is right on this take.
I will add that this likely is also satire, since the guy has stated that he doesn't like cutting Hit Points.
@@theposhdinosaur7276 Not necessarily satire. The whole thing about his "chad" skits is that they're supposed to make other players have as much fun as possible and in this one he decided that the chad DM should prioritize everyone getting some action and having fun.
@@SuperUnnamedplayer Yes satire may not be the right word, but I think this should be looked at the same as the "weakest Brazilian male" meme. It is supposed to be an extreme that you shouldn't necesarily take literally.
ok, then I'm adding extra HP to my character too.
Xp to 3 has gotten way more cringe the larger he has gotten
A sad tale of far too many
The eternal foodcope
You can tell once the pronouns start showing on their name cards.
Lol! He wanted to be like Coleville but just ended up fat as fuck with nothing insightful or entertaining to say.
Ever since he ended his wizard saga its gotten harder and harder to be able to sit through his vids. Cant remember the last time i saw one of his vids either.
Personaly find Jocats "crap guides to DnD" particularly enlightening.
I do too, shame tho jocat is a cuck tho.
@@walearris he now? shame.
He's even more woke.
PIppa : "I believe in Rule of Cool..."
Player: "Ok just listen up, if we try to produce the explosives with good berries then if we consider their potential calories value we could..."
Pippa: "... there is a limit though"
Pippa clearly should be peer-pressured into playing a FATAL session
This guy does a lot of satirical comedic skits.
I watch this guy's content fairly regularly. He has some interesting positions, but the HP thing is a terrible take. Rules are there for a reason, as is HP for enemies. It provides context.
That take have me ptsd from a dm who did that and killed my character because he didn't realise how much damage was being thrown around since he didn't track hp. He took a mindflayer that has about 80 go and let it soak 500 damage because nothing really cool happened to kill it
He needs to lose some weight
I track HP, but sometimes it is worth just killing the enemy or increasing a bit of HP. Something that is also fun to do is giving last resource so the players can feel a bit of panic, even if the fight was easy.
If I did something smart or cool to try and shave a good chunk of HP off the boss early on the fight/before the fight starts and then the dm tells me the boss will die only when something cool happens regardless of me, I would just get pissed and stop trying.
Every D&D channel occasionally posts incredibly stupid opinions. It comes with the game unfortunately. I would say XP to Level 3 is slightly more frequent than most in his dumb takes though. The "no HP" DMs suffer from severe shortsightedness. They had one single boss fight where the players critted him down in one round and thought "wow that was lame I'm never letting that happen again." In my experience, the players will laugh about a fight like that for years afterward. Not everything has to be an *EPIC CINEMATIC MOMENT.* Otherwise the actual epic cinematic moments that emerge from the mechanics organically won't have any significance.
People who only watched Jacob's skits and never seen his actual games he's run keep coming to his skits for guidance and I'm so tired of seeing it at the table.
That was the most pained "Please~!" I've heard in a while.
Remember kids, gatekeeping your hobby is good.
I think the best way for Pippa to learn about DMing would be for her to do a couple one shots with the people who want to play before doing a long campaign so she can figure out how the other girls want to play
Having an actual session 0 also helps a lot with it. I always like to ask what they hope to see, what they'd like to avoid (triggers basically) etc. You don't have to adhere to a playstyle or anything. You can always fix things mid journey
I've had some 'bad' (?) GM's over the years. One ran an 'introductory' adventure for 3 new players. 3 lv 1 characters... 1st monster was a Cr 6 golem. Just one-shotted everyone. Another one had a player character outright kill another because they fumbled a range attack. Great fun for the guy who was given no chance to act, just went from full health to dead with no chance to save themselves.
Pippa's style of D&D sounds exactly like the kind I like
Content warnings shouldnt be needed if youre dming for friends. In a public game for strangers it might be helpful but if you know the people the dm should be able to figure it out
Wrong. If you can't handle fictional woes then you shouldn't even be allowed in public.
@@ErrantPathfinder some of the public games are expected to be an absolute introductory experience suitable even for children. Any game run for normal adults id agree though
This. It’s one thing if you’re DMing people you don’t really know. W/ friends? You should know each other’s humor and what buttons to push and not push. Zero reason for content warnings w/ people you know
@@jeice13you are a dufus, should they put out a trigger warning before the hydras teeth scene in Jason and the Argonauts despite being pretty obviously designed with a larg proportion being choldrenA?
@@ErrantPathfinder sorry buddy I'm not here for your in-depth furry ERP session.
"content warnings" is just a gay political rephrasing of the same page exercise, something competent tabletop groups have practiced for years
the fun thing with dnd is that different people like to play it differently and want different things out of it, and they can totally do that. Its all about communication and finding the right players and dm for you. The gigchad dm is an extreme caricature of one end, but a lot of people like a dm that is flexible, and as long as they dont see behind the curtain fudging some numbers can help with things like the pacing or narrative of the game. Other people prefer something more strict and challenging, where they feel the tension that things could go wrong any moment. Since the game is run by a person instead of a computer, people can play what ever version of the game they want and thats what makes it so cool
I strongly agree with nearly everything Pippa said about DMing.
in 3 hours, there should be 3 fights, some RP, bunch of jokes, exploring, loot
but the biggest thing: everyone adds to the story
My group adds in some houserules just out of convenience. Like for initiative, we just have one person roll against one of the monsters, and either we all go at once or the monsters all go at once, just so everyone can make their moves without anyone waiting for anyone else. And we are usually very lazy so the DM will just tell us when we level instead of everyone needing to track experience. But yes some of the things in this seemed rather silly. Thank you friend.
I've had a lot of success having DMPCs who are capable noobs, where the PCs get to be the cool capable people who show the DMPC around. They can still be there when you need them to adjust things or highlight plot points or introduce ideas or whatever.
I'm usually the DM, but if I get to be a player and play a warlock or something, at the end of the session, after agonising over when and where to use my spell slots effectively and I find out it's literally irrelevant because shit dies on a whim, amma introduce the DM to the concept of having 0HP personally.
Edit: also really goofy boss deaths to piss-weak attacks or goofy situations are funny and memorable yet get overlooked and forgotten if the DM is looking for a cinematic death. I hate the term rail-roading because people mis/overuse it but not using hitpoints is essentially the combat equivalent imho.
implying a warlock has to agonise over their spell slots when they just have a gun by default
@@sileopatronus "So anyway, I started Eldritch Blasting. BANG! BAH!"
I love that smug look Pippa has lol it's soooooo good. She's a treasure and must be protected at all costs
What makes me a good DM? Well if I was a bad DM I wouldn't be here discussin' it with ya now, would I?
Ah, the 5e 'Tourist Takes' on how to make D&D games 'better'. The only reason I don't find them more repulsive is because it's not like 5e is asking for you to abide by its own rules and mechanics. Now it's all about people sitting around the table and doing pretendy-time with some notional dice rolls.
I'll even say something controversial: As busted as the Dark Souls tabletop RPG was, it at least took 5e's ruleset and made it an actual GAME and didn't pull its punches. Nu-D&D is just a lifestyle brand with a half-assed tabletop game ruleset written by board gamers.
Excellent take! You a part of the ad&d and 3.5 superiority gang as well?
@@WeWillAlwaysHaveVALIS _Blasphemy!_ Don't you ever group 2e and 3.5 together.
@@WeWillAlwaysHaveVALISas much as you might not like it, hes 100% correct
If it was written by board gamers it would have actual rules. It was written by theater majors.
@@WeWillAlwaysHaveVALIS I prefer my RPG's to have rules more complex than a board game for children. But if I'm a part of a 'superiority gang', it's "The only thing worse than fifth is fourth" crew. And I'm objectively correct.
And here's the thing: Fourth Edition should have just been boxed up and turned into a board game.
The undead warning was most likly:
"Will you be fine havig your character be a zombie?"
2:14 thats for the historical accuracy crowd.
Just look up how many the Khans sired.
I think one of the guys in chat really explains what happened.
"THIS IS SO CRINGE" >Agrees with most of the video
Gotta love Pippa
I completely understand Pippa's murderous anger at this. Those people commenting under the video agreeing with that idiocy should be rounded up, locked in a barn with the rest of their kind, and set a nice cleansing fire to that we may improve our stock. The gene pool needs some chlorine.
Bit intense, but low-key agree
Bit intense, but high-key agree.
I'll bring the lighters.
God damn dude, but yeah I'm getting kind of tired of the carebear crowd.
I don't do much of anything with DnD, but I'll never forget what these streamers I used to watch did. They took turns trying to pocket gold left on a table, they all failed, and then the last one took his turn. The half-orc man rolled a Nat 20.
DM: "Holy shit.... ok, well you not only pocketed the gold, you pocketed the table."
same with me and the phrase "It's hard to pocket a baby."
there isn't a character limit high enough to fully explain that gag
So uh, nobody noticed a group of people all taking turns failing to grab some gold on a table? Christ.
wow, your DM is shit
Gigachad DM vs D&D Elitist mindset lol
you haven't lived until you tried to rizz Strahd and succeed
This rant encapsulates the entire reason why I don't play DnD anymore.
Playing a role-playing game without any risk or consequence, with everything padded for comfort...I'd rather just read a children's book. Get about the same out of it.
What Pippa needs to realize is that people sometimes don't realize they don't want what they say they want, they lie to themselves. Pippa needs to just figure out what she wants from DnD, communicate that idea to her group, and play that. She can't choose to satisfy everyone, she should focus on the game she, and her group wants to play.
Edit: She should look into OSR, it matches her values quite a bit.
Man watching Pippa get mad at XP to Level 3 is so cathartic. I can't stand most of that guy's takes
He has pretty bad takes, especially about how 'broken' Wizards are. If memory serves the majority of the spells he complained about weren't even in the Wizard's spell list, Silence and Heat metal. Like yeah Wizard's are a bit imbalanced, but that's true for all primary casters. Bards are by far the most broken class in 5th.It's just lazy rehashing of complaints of 3.X editions.
His takes are infamously godawful.
@@theofrost1140 heat metal and silence are nowhere near the best spells lol
@@theofrost1140 There is no such thing as 'balance' in 5e; trying to attain it is a fool's errand
use hp!
Pippa playing D&D is the greatest thing I have learned of recently. If you ever do a Discord game I call dibs on a seat🤣
Yeah... putting romance into D&D is pretty scuffed, tbh. Gets the hackles up something fierce.
I don't know about anyone else, but, hypothetically, if a bunch of weirdo, murderhobos, walked in to my shop and, for example, one lifted an anvil, barehanded, and told me he would drop it on me, unless he got a discount, I would be thoroughly intimidated by the lifting action by itself. So a Stat roll, any stat, for "intimidation" is totally valid.
I want pippa to start playing stuff again, it's fun to hear her talk about it
When you don't understand something in a TTRPG and want to do things your way, learn what a Chesterton Fence mean
Sometimes DMPCs are necessary. The game i'm in with my friends started as a fast oneshot with 1 player and dmpc to teach him how the game works. Then I joined and the party had three martials and thus a spellcaster was required so a second dmpc was needed. Then we realized we had no healing so a third dmpc was added.
Yeah I usually agree with Jacob's approach to the game, but that take about undoing turns and not tracking hit points, plus all the people agreeing with it in the comments always bugged me.
Like I can understand fudging hit points on enemies when you're learning to DM and you fucked up the encounter balance and you've accidentally made a fight way too easy, or way too hard. But just outright not tracking it and waiting for everyone to do something cool just seems really lame to me. If I found out my DM did this, it'd immediately kill almost all my enjoyment for the game, and if I told my players I did that, I'm sure they'd feel the same way.
For anyone who's considered doing that style of play, I'd advise you to reconsider for 2 main reasons:
- It invalidates player choice. for example, a player might choose to use a big greatsword instead of a longsword and shield, basically trading off their defense for more damage. But if the DM isn't tracking hp, then damage doesn't actually matter, so they player's choice to be better at dealing damage is also meaningless.
- And lastly, but most importantly, if a player's character happens to die in combat, it's no longer their own fault, or the fault of the dice (bad luck). It becomes entirely the fault of the DM, since they chose not to run the game in a fair way. Player choice in combat doesn't matter, the dice don't matter, the only deciding factor is how long the DM decides the fight will go for, and if a PC ends up dead because a fight went on for a bit too long, then they've effectively just chosen to kill off that PC, and there's nothing the player could have done to prevent this.
That said, I assume any DM that actually runs this style of game, would just asspull a resurrection on the dead PC out of nowhere, that way even the stakes are meaningless.
For any aspiring DM's out there, I'd suggest checking out Matt Colville, he has a bunch of videos with DMing advice, but it's also a lot of content to go through. I think the best way to learn DMing is to just jump into it with a group of friends and give it a go. Either run a premade adventure, or just make something up and run the game you want to run, don't try to emulate another DMs style like Matt Mercer, just run your own game. Try out different ideas, keep what works, discard what doesn't, and understand that you're going to make mistakes, but as long as you can learn from those mistakes, then you'll eventually become a good DM.
That bit about not tracking HP sounds good to a casual audience on paper, but anyone experienced on either the player or DM side who thinks about it for a minute realizes how awful an idea it is.
The worst part about this is that he was being cheeky; he doesn't actually do this in his games. But the people who watch his videos will unironically agree with it, which shows you the weird place the D&D community is at now.
I avoided all of this by simply switching to a system that doesn't have player character death
I'm in agreement, death should and consequences should always be a part of the game. Not something that's always at the back of their necks but something that's waiting in the wings ready to swoop in if everything falls apart. I've lost characters, seen characters die and killed them as the DM.
It feels good to see someone both praise and criticize Jacob. There are plenty of things that I like to hear, but other things are stupid. Like he thinks 'protection' is an awful fighting style and stands by it.
The most important guideline for dnd is about making sure people have fun.
Remember the golden rule of DMing. As the DM, you have final say on what the rules are even if it contradicts what is said in rulebooks. What rules to use and follow is up to your discretion but remember that you need to make sure the rules are fair and challenging enough to allow people have enough fun so they return next session.
This advice can be a honeytrap sometimes because incompetent DMs prioritize short-term fun over the long-term.
If you give your players powerful magic items for example, it will seem fun to them in the moment but it may destabilize your whole campaign. All the encounters you have planned or will plan likely won't be fun because the players are now too powerful.
Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
I love the characters my players have and get just as sad when a PC dies.
I agree with Pippa so much.
I can't tell if he is joking or not, the cringe is so intense you'd think it has to be a joke, but ppl really do be like this
Can't handle how Backpfeifengesicht he is, why does he keep looking at the camera like that
It's parody
did you have a stroke in the second sentence?
When the turn ends, you lose the right to reverse course.
Here's the thing: every DM has their way of how they want to run their table and every player has a way they want to play. The only ways to really know whether you'll mesh is to try.
Pippa's opinion on how a game should be run isn't the same as the guy behind 3XP, and that's fine. Variety is the spice of life.
Pippa is adorable.
XP to Level 3 gives notoriously terrible advice, as does everyone whose only TTRPG is 5th Edition.
100% true
All TTRPGs are absorbing this new bullshit culture now. I'm not gonna waste time learning a new system that I'll never get to play with actually cool people.
Being a 5E (only) kid is generally a red flag, just saying.
I agree with Pippa in most things. I would rather have my players keep their character because they become attached to it, it's just a natural human trait. I don't go out of my way to KEEP their character alive, but balance the challenges so that they take responsibility if they DO die.
I am a new DnD player. Started around the time 5e launched. I understand the old guard who hated 5e, because seeing how the people play who came in when it blew up in mainstream annoys the absolute hell out of me. I am luckily blessed with a DM who painstakingly tries to give us a challenge, and not just kills the BBEG when he thinks it's cool.
Pippa, casate conmigo.
80% of it is on the DM but that last 20% will make or break any campaign: player participation.
As a DM, I'd rather have a passionate min/maxer, obtuse MC-and-his-handlers, or amateur theatre-major. There's plenty of material to build stuff on with all of those.... as oppose to the ones who just do nothing even when a couple of clue-by-fours clonks them on the noggin.
my paladin friend unironically rolled a nat 20 to seduce a green dragon when i was dming. when i'm not dming, i just consistently roll at least 5 nat 1s and we usually play with crit fail so yea. loaded dice i swear.
(Both 1 and 20 result in the dragon deciding to take you as part of its treasure horde)
Reminder that you're only supposed to roll dice when the _outcome is uncertain._ That means there has to be a reasonable chance of success. While dragons have been known to polymorph into humans to mate sometimes, this seems pretty far fetched without the use of magic
DM: "I completely trust You all"
Me: "Oh... You must be pretty new to Role Playing then?"
Oh god I thought for a second that DemonDice was on the thumbnail I’m so sorrrrrrry
Now that you mention it...
Repent!
"you don't have to be weird about it"
Based DM:
"the dragon picks you up and puts you inside of a flask"
never again they will try it
I don't like the not counting HP part too, that pretty much take the G out of the RPG, but I think undoing is sometimes fine depending on the context.
Like if a player ran out of spells or somebody already used up something and they says they're using those, I wouldn't be like "Sorry, but your action failed so your turn is skipped". But if they got a bad roll and failed their attack or something like that, I wouldn't allows.
And Pippa got that right about the turn thing: It can be interpreted as an asshole move if you skip somebody turns simply because they're taking too long.
Sometimes people can't think quick enough, lacks the ability to plan ahead, or is simply new to the whole thing, or bad at math, or they're just want to be really thorough.
You can't put skill check in real life to gatekeep someone from doing something for fun, or they'll just quit and go do something else.
I'd think the DM have a problem with me if he/she do that to me and I would just quietly quit because I wouldn't play with people that have problems with me.
Beside that's kinda metagaming. A player being slow in deciding what they'd do is not connected to how quick their characters would think/act because that should be depending on their stats.