I'm very much a fan of the custom weapon system. Not just because of its intended usage, but because it shows us that the publisher is using their own Checks & Balances system.
Coach, much respect for being willing to balance by nerfing stuff. Balancing by only increasing power (so as not to upset anyone) can so quickly lead to bigger game problems. This is the good design that we want/need/love!
I disagree with crossbows “homing in their sights” due to the fact that you have to take them out of your sights in order to reload between every shot. I think bows and crossbows could be switched, with bows benefiting from getting the power, lead and trajectory dialed in for the next shot, and the crossbow befitting from a slowed target making their single shot easier to hit.
This makes more sense logically. Usually the game fantasy of crossbow is doing more damage and what people expect. But I don't think DC20 should necessarily be tied to that just because people expect that from other games.
Sounds like a decent change. I wish there was something to make crossbows better for anyone behind cover. With crossbows, you can wait all day until someone pops their head from cover before you shoot, but not with bows.
"Hitting but dealing 0 damage doesn't feel weird right?" That's exactly how armour is supposed to be imagined, wearing plate mail doesn't make you better at dodging, it just means when you get hit, you aren't hurt by it because there's a solid steel plate between the weapon and your body.
I imagine baseline armor class as your basic dodge. So any damage that misses because of the armor your wearing (11 and up) i imagine it as glancing or deflecting off the armor.
The only issue I have with that is that that’s what the physical damage reduction system is supposed to do already. Make armor to where it will actually mechanically stop the damage of a 1 or 2 damage weapon and give that to all creatures who would have it, baking it into the weapon system takes a piece away from the armor system that should be there while also making the bolas as shown in this video not a damage option at all while being in the weapons category. It seems to me that all most all weapons, defiantly the bolas and maybe the net to do at least 1 damage and if the creature has armor that negates that then he’s fine.
@@thekinglygamer6375Since the game has heavy hits, raising your AC effectively does negate extra damage. If one character has AC of 13 and another has AC of 18, and they take different damage from an attack roll of 20.
But if you can deal 0 damage, that doesn't in any way take into account whether the target is armored/padded. A skinny caster (or civilian) dressed in pajamas can be hit with an attack that normally deals 0 damage and if those heavy hits don't add any bonus, that's 0 damage to a pajama wearing caster for a hit. That doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Similarly I don't think it makes that much sense for a net attack to deal any damage through Heavy Hits. Unless the net edges are tied to some big rocks or something, this is an example of a game system that doesn't translate all too well to the physical realm. If you want to reflect this armor philosophy then you should separate dodge AC from armor AC. So small and nimble rogues can dodge around and avoid attacks altogether, and the big hulking Knight/Fighter cannot dodge around due to the bulk of his armor, but he cannot feel any or much damage from many weapon attacks, with the exception of bludgeoning damage. But perhaps he would get tired from being subjected to repeated bashes from various weapons. To be truthful to such a system you would basically need to break down damage from any source so every weapon or spell attack has some measure of X, Y, and Z damage. You could increase the complexity by adding an armor piercing stat. Parries could be separated into half-parry, where you lower the damage but still get hit, and full-parry, where you completely deflect/block the opponent's weapon swing and take no damage. You can do soooo much to design a damage/armor (or extended to combat) system that is more truthful to realism. And while it can be fun to engage in such a system if you really want to nerd it out, it becomes less fun for the less nerdy and more casual gamers who just want to see number against number, biggest one wins. Easy peezy, lets get going.
Love it, I used a weapon building system in 5e for years and years, and it looks nearly identical to what you have built. It’s so functional. DC20 is literally D&D 6e
Yea, it's funny how many people have similar ideas but the big brands are too stiff to change their stuff so now the fans are coming up with their own 😄
Nice! You know it might just be me, but I feel like the weapon passives for the bow and crossbow could be switched. While I think hitting someone while Slowed would be easier with any ranged weapon, the higher rate of fire with a bow makes me think that adjusting your aim would be easier. Just food for thought.
@LevTheLurker will you should get more attacks with the bow. A trained bowman can release attacks faster than a trained crossbowman. The issue is that the bow is a professional weapon, whereas the crossbow can be used by peasants with little training historically. Also, the crossbow does more damage because of the AP cost.
Also to add: since the crossbow requires AP to reload, you can only get off 2 shots per round (on average). The crossbow passive requires attacking the same creature, meaning you'll only get the +1 damage bonus once per turn (again on average). If the target required to be Slowed (or some other condition), then that condition can be set up on a previous turn to then followup with 2 attacks (+2 damage) on your next turn. Rapid-fire with the bow (+1 dmg attacking same target) means you could get up +3 dmg if you hit will all attacks, but would likely be in the +2 dmg range. Anyways, excited for game and I love the constant tinkering!
LOVE THIS! One of my first thoughts to critique, is to swap the placement of the weapon name (longsword) and the weapon style (sword) When I look through this chart, I want to find a specific type of weapon, and the instinct to do that is to look on the far left
I am going to screen shot this and show it to my team... I said the same thing! LOL :) But yea we will keep looking for clarity points on how to best present things across the board, so thank you!
@@TheDungeonCoach I had the same thought initially. However when I thought more on the topic two things occurred to me: 1. Weapon identity in this system heavily leans into the chosen style and subsequent properties. With the current style names, the style almost represents the weapon better than the actual given name for a weapon. This is reflected by the fact there are instances where multiple different weapons can fall into the same style and property combination. It's worth noting that I think this is fantastic for clarity and helps it stand out from other systems, where they list multiple named weapons in a table that practically share the exact same mechanical properties but are spread out because they are listed alphabetically and it just clutters the table and wastes space on the page/screen. 2. Part of the problem with this instinct/intuition stems from the visual alignment of the terminology used in the table. First of all, while "Style" is listed at the top (rightly so) because it is overall most important, but then you have "Melee Weapons" underneath it and "One Handed" underneath that, your intuition is that names of "One Handed Melee Weapons" will be in the same column. This is further exacerbated by the fact "Type" is the systems terminology for distinguishing "Melee/Ranged" but is then the header for the column above the given names of weapons. Once you realise what is going on though, it actually becomes easier to associate the important cells of the table with the weapon names because the important data is immediately left and right. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen players read tables incorrectly, (particularly when late night gaming and their tired) eyes look at the far left of the table for the object they need but then accidentally shift up or down a row when looking to the far right for the property. There's a couple solutions to this, but central to the problem is standardisation of terminology. By having One Handed, Versatile, Two-Handed for melee and then Bow and Crossbow for ranged as subheadings, particularly placed in the "style" column, it causes confusion and gives more weight to the terms as unique identifiers, distinguished from the same terms used in the properties column. Moreover One Handed isn't even a named property since it is the default for melee type weapons and the "type" label for a column undermines this further by stripping away the terms meaning from distinguishing melee and ranged weapons. I would recommend having title columns left to right as: Style | Examples/Weapons | Properties | Damage Then a title row underneath that reads: Type: Melee/Ranged/Special You could then further use sub-title rows for One Handed, Versatile and Two-Handed but the alignment should be over the Properties column, which may look bizarre but it will enhance clarity. Arguably you could just remove the sub-title rows entirely and just ensure that Versatile and Two-Handed are the first properties listed in their column so it is clear that the styles are sorted alphabetically but grouped by these two key properties. You also don't really need subheadings for the bow and crossbow weapons due to them being grouped by the styles. An alternative option is to move the styles to switch the style and example columns and then rename all of the styles, but that would not only be more work, it would probably also reduce clarity of the mechanics intent and reduce the importance of a weapon styles representation of the weapon.
To the Dungeon Coach and team: Some ideas for more weapon properties: 1. Balanced. +1 to hit. Costs 1 point. 2. Un-Balanced. -1 to hit. Costs -1 point. 3. Extra sharp. Critical strike on a 19 instead of a 20. Costs 1 point. (Or maybe 2?) 4. Lightweight. Can be drawn without using a minor action. Costs 1 point. (Making a javelin with lightweight and toss, to quickly toss 2 javelins then draw you normal weapon using minor action) 5. Huge. Normal attack cost 2AP instead of 1AP. (Give it +1 or even +2 damage and a cost of 0 to maybe -1) (Perfect for making a HUGE warhammer to clobber your foes!) 6. Parry. Whenever you take the "Parry maneuver" grant a +7 to PD instead of +5 to PD. Costs 1 7. Pierce/Impale. Stab 2 enemies standing in line. Costs 2 point. (or 1?) (That could also be a maneuver in itself) Edit for more properties ideas! 8. Encumbrance. -1 Speed when wielding the weapon. Costs -2 points. 9. Super Critical. Critical hits give +2 damage. (total of 4 in the current system) Costs 2 points. 10. Armor Piercing. Ignore resistance to damage type. OR ignores Personal Damage reduction at normal hits. Costs 1 (or 2?) points. 11. Channeling. Gives +1 to Spellattacks when wielding this weapon. Costs 2 points. (So a wizard can make a staff with: Unwieldy, guard, and channeling for a +1 to PD and Spell attack)
@@lucasgoulart7856 Oh! That way if you have one "leftover" AP from the last round, you can use it to lift up your weapon, preparing to strike next round for only 1AP
I can very well see the 0 base dmg "weapons" work for things that aren't made primarily to harm others (improvised weapons, shields, unarmed attacks), but they still do hurt if: 1) You deal a heavy hit. Just too good of a strike. 2) You know what are you doing (i.e. monk with bare fists, ruffian-type rogue with an improvised weapon). 3) You use some on-hit delivery system (i.e. a raging barbarian deals more damage on hit or you can use some techniques/maneuvers like grappling attack that grapples (and possibly initiates strangling) on hit, but still damages only on a Heavy). This also opens fun options with improvised weapons: Take a situation where a pub brawl starts and your fighter takes a table leg and starts whacking others with it. I can see the table leg being a 0 dmg weapon with Versatile and Impact properties - it doesn't hit as hard as a war club (duh), but you can still wield it quite effectively with the general fighter options (I mean, tripping 'em with the table leg is a time-honored pub brawl option) and once you get that Heavy hit, it actually harms someone rather dangerously.
Looks very fun to play around with custom weapons! I've definitely run into some issues with D&D weapons before not covering exactly what I was looking for. I paused to take a stab at a trident before listening to your suggestions. Spear with Toss + Impact (thinking maybe the extra prongs can give it the potential for a nastier wound than your standard spear) OR with Toss + Versatile (mostly because I think the extra prongs should help make it more likely to hit in many cases). However, there is a Korean trident called a dangpa that is used defensively, to trap your enemy's weapon between the prongs, so another trident option is a Spear with Guard (and maybe Versatile based on the limited info I can find saying it could be used 1- or 2-handed). Sounds like we had similar thoughts :)
I cannot wait until this project fully drops. I'll still play D&D but man... I want this thing to be polished so I can run it for my friends! Had my first game the other day. It was the GM's second time GMing anything. It went how you'd expect but so much smoother than if it were a DnD game.
Hey Coach I'm back! Glad to see you released on Kickstarter! I'm a bit behind you, but I'm happy with your progress! I had some constructive feedback here, and maybe a hot take at the same time haha, but here goes: Cantrips should NOT deal as much damage as martials do, period, ever. Spells should be stronger than melee in my opinion, but only at a significant cost. In my game system I have scaling weapons and spells, spells cost mana (up to 10 at the moment), and the lower 1 mana cost spells deal about as much as a common quality single handed weapon, while 2 mana cost spells are about a common quality two handed weapon. The draw of magic is the ability to affect multiple targets by default, to affect the mind and the battlefield, and yes at higher mana cost, devastate enemies. I'm proud of you for sticking it out and getting it released sir! If you ever want to theory craft, let me know.
"Throw the DC20 hat in the ring." People... DC20 is literally just more geared to BE FUN to play than 5.5e imo. I know not all feel that way but the Kickstarter makes it clear that MANY do.
@@ДюсековИльясit's ok but what D&D really has going for it is brand recognition. People will call TTRPGs "D&D", like how Kleenex and Band-aid are brand names that are used more often than tissue or bandage. There are so many better TTRPGs out there but people only really hear D&D and probably assume it's either the best (because of popularity) or the only option.
@@ДюсековИльясbut which system has more engaging combat out of the box? Dc20 every day of the week. There is a reason every DNDtuber has a "how to speed up your DND combat" video. Engaging combat is THE thing players care about in these games. If you care more about story/narrative, there are far better games for that. A significant amount of 5e players are like Dragonball fans. They stepped to the entrance of the gateway to anime and will just stay there even if objectively better things are deeper inside because it's all they know.
@@ДюсековИльясnot saying it isnt fun but he has some room to be alot better and more fun. Plus look how long dnd has been around and how long it has dominated the scene. It’s time for something fresh and exciting and outside the box
Gotta love the inclusion of the meteor hammer! Though @15:29 that is in fact a rope dart, similar flexible weapon, as much fun to play with! The main difference is that the meteor is bludgeoning and the rope dart is piercing, leading to the meteor hammer working horizontally, whereas the rope dart is more on the verticallity and shooting to hit the target straight instead of slamming around.
Less than 3k until the Kickstarter hits 1.7 mill. Got the special edition because I'm so excited for this game! Anyone watching please join the West Marches so I can run a game for you!
Every time you make a big change like this, at first I'm unsure about it, but then the more I think about it the better it is. Also I think a 0 damage shield bash could be great. You use your shield and the trip maneuver to knock an enemy down, and then since it's technically dual wielding you can make a main weapon attack at advantage without a MCP. Keep up the good work!
I think it is a bit clunky to spent several paragraphs on saying that both weapon types (melee and ranged) start with 2 points, and ranged also gain ammo, unwieldy and two-handed properties/flaws without gaining the property points for it, but you can use your properties to remove those "forced" flaws, except ammo. Sorry, too many hoops for my tired mind. Wouldn't it be shorter/less confusing to say: Melee weapons start with 2 property points. Ranged weapons start with 0 property points and always carry the ammo property. Tip: You can add flaws to your weapon to gain more PP.
Love this! Already got some inspiration: Ranged Ranger (maybe Fighter?), but still using Might as Prime. They have a MASSIVE heavy bow they designed themselves. Added Heavy and Reload to the standard Ranged Weapon setup to build the concept weapon. Think like the Orc in LOTR that was shooting Boromir. Doesn't shoot far, but it PUNCHES what's in range!
Totally making a greatsword with the 2 handed, unwieldy, heavy, impact, reach, and guard properties. "That thing was too big to be called a sword. Too big, too thick, too heavy, and too rough, it was more like a large hunk of iron." Edit: Just got to the point where heavy costs 2 points. Maybe it could reduced to 1 cost since weapon damage has been nerfed and it requires a negative property to use? Or perhaps if a melee weapon take both the negative properties allow 3 bonus points to compensate? I want to make the dragon slayer haha.
I understand that Martials needed nerfs, and to summarize: - Weapon maneuvers are removed, which were mostly 1 AP for +1 damage and a rider-effect like inflict a condition. We already have the Power Maneuver to add +1 damage for 1 AP, so the weapon maneuver was the Power Maneuver + rider. Seeing how many martial classes start with 2-4 weapons, this also removes 2-4 maneuvers as options during combat. Perhaps we will see an increase in the numbers of Maneuvers you can select at level 1 and over the levels. Hopefully they get some of that flexibility/utility back. - Some weapon maneuvers returns as regular maneuvers but without the damage bonus. - Weapon styles remain largely the same, but some nerfs/buffs are applied. For instance Axes used to deal +1 damage to Bloodied (
So excited to try out the new weapon system. Not having specific weapon maneuvers will make it a bit less intimidating for new players. So grateful for all you and your team do. This system is jewel for creative types, and for encouraging others to get creative.
In that weapon builder, you should also put in a dropdown menu for picking weapon types. I'm very much looking forward to customizing my own weapons! It's a thing in other games I've played, but this looks more streamlined, efficient, and balanced.
Digging the power balance update. Feels much more "I can kill stuff, you can kill stuff, and we should work together because we're all in danger". Never got that feeling with the system that shall not be named.
The balance of caster vs martials is something that leaves me a bit worried now, because yes martials felt a little bit better than spellcasters, but this is levels 1 and 2 we are talking so I just asumed casters would be better at later levels (just not as big of a gap as dnd)
Hey Alan! I’m so happy that this has been so successful. I am a teacher with a young son too and it has been so heart warming to see you be successful. You’re living the dream man and can’t wait to see how this all evolves.
Yes dude! Yes! Custom weapon system! Honestly so hyped, ready for to get this beta in my hands! Keep it up coach LOVE the direction you and the team are taking the system!
No more weapon maneuvers? Probably for the best. 3 attack maneuvers + 4 selected maneuvers + WEAPON maneuvers was way too much for lvl 1 martial characters. Good stuff here!
it is kinda expected that casters are a bit more complicated anyway but not all martials should be like that, and I agree that it was too many options for the people I tried to introduce to the system, so I made them select a few anyway and they still felt they had waaay more freedom to do stuff vs 5e
@@elneos6343 I believe the key here is optional limitation. For 5e you also get suggested spell selections for casters for those who just want to get moving. For those who can stomach it, they can browse, then choose and pick. I would rather the DC20 core book make some suggestions on the maneuvers to take (Expose, Hinder, Parry, and then Raise Shield/Trip - all being very well-rounded and good), and advice GMs to allow postponing selecting maneuvers until the player has had a little more experience with combat and the game system - they already have the Attack Maneuvers to try it out. That may also make clear for the player what they actually need/want for combat. Of course you shouldn't add new maneuvers during combat or anytime during action of a game session, but during rest or between sessions seems appropriate. Huh... I didn't actually realize how many weapons you're set to start with and expected it was similar to 5e where 1 type is common and 2 is possible, with 3 being near impossible - meaning Weapon Maneuvers would normally only add +1-2 additional maneuvers to take into account. For DC20 your martials are more likely to start with between 2 and 4 weapon types, with a weight towards the lower end. Regardless I find it okay to remove Weapon Maneuvers. However seeing how some are simply transferred to regular maneuvers, I would like to see the amount of maneuvers gained over levels (and possibly at level 1) increase. It is after all options and not bonuses, so it should be somewhat equated to spell repertoire where a level 1 caster starts with 3 cantrips and 4 spells and a bunch of level 1 class features (looking at you Druid).
Okay, kinda sad you had to remove the old maneouvres, but I am LOVING the changes to the styles and properties! And you actually gave me an incentive to grab a whip and enjoy doing so. Kudos on that! Keep it awesome, Coach. This is a turn in the right direction and it feels awesome.
I love this! But i have 3 thoughts 1. Crossbows should have a set damage rather than the property it has. But in DC20 its not just about damage or aim, its both in one roll. So you could have this property on a light or hand crossbow, but doesn't on bigger/heavier ones like the heavy crossbow, you have to move the crossbow itself to reload. But because its a crossbow your aim is thrown off but your damage is still the same, the sling is still pulled back in the same position. I think this should be moved to the bows because bows are more about the feel of firing an arrow, more you do it the better you can feel out where your target is. Then again, with heavier/bigger crossbows, you might be required to set it up to fire. Like a bi-stand or something to keep it in place. So maybe it should be another property just for crossbows. A way to place your crossbow, becoming improvable and requireing an action to pick it up, but gives it that bonus 1 dmg. BUT i think it should have a prerequisite of something. Heavy is to expensive so maybe something else like unwieldy? 2. I love the 0 dmg idea so much! Honestly I'd love a property on blunt or slashing wrapons where the base damage is 0 but heavy or brutal hits are a +2 or 3 respectively. Just to see this feature in more options would be cool. (Or maybe a magic weapon!!) 3. The whole 0 dmg thing made me remember and miss your old armor HB dnd video. Having the difference between agility making your AC then your armor AC then a range in-between where damage is halfed. I took that idea and ran with it! Not anything to note here, just wanted to reminisce on the time before DC20 and how far this community has come.
I absolutely thought 'nerfing' martials was a bad idea until you explained that it levels the playing field, at least starting out... and that's beautiful because now is the time to make those kinds of adjustments! GREAT work!
Dude. I'm such a fan of shadiversity and the shword concept (shield+sword), with this system is TOTALLY DOABLE!!! It's a really big sword that has handles o the side to make it easier to block attacks and protect your body. So you can make it with the properties of two handed(-1), heavy(+2), and guard(+1). Maybe take into account that is big so take reach(+1) and unwieldy(-1). My god this man makes pure gold material to play with
I notice there is no light property. I guess the concession is that lighter weapons still do the same damage, but in picking up properties associated with light weapons (concealed, thrown) that you miss out on taking other properties like impact. It does make me wonder if there is going to be some changes to how dual wielding works though.
Recommend renaming the 'Heavy' weapon property, or switching Impact and Heavy. I can immediately predict confusion issues with 'Wait, the Heavy property isn't related to Heavy Hits?'
@@TheDungeonCoach Seeing how the properties are actually used, I do like Impact for what you're going for, so renaming Heavy is the better move. Impact feels good, it feels solid, and it really evokes the idea of 'this weapon can sometimes hit harder. It has a good Impact.' I think a better word for the 'Heavy' property would actually be 'Strong.' Seeing 'Heavy' makes me think weighty, two-handed, unwieldy, etc. People coming from DnD will get tricked as well, because there it's a strictly negative property that gives disadvantage for Small characters. Everybody gets 'Strong' though. At a glance, you know that means this weapon is a good weapon. It's Strong. Why does it do 2 damage? Cause it's Strong.
Most combat maneuvers like Shoving, grappling etc can only be used against enemies 0 - 2 size categories greater then youself, but how awesome would it be if instead of not being possible, istead the dc would rise by 5 for each size category, could be the" same " for huge creatures shoving smaller enemies, but only starting to reduce the dc at 2 size categories Just imagine the medium barbarian getting all the buffs to hopefully shove the massive fire giant down into the abyss to avoid a tpk. The cliff is 1 space away, normally you would need a 20 to shove him down, but he is just so freakin huge, the downed rogue uses his action for a help die,the bloodied cleric casts bless(+2mp to increase it to 1d6). the lvl 4 barbarian uses 1 ap to give himself advantage to shove the giant(+adv for rage?). He rolls now with 3d20+ ~5?+1d8 helpdice+1d6 bless and everyone prays that he somehow manages to get a 30 and push the giant this one tiny space down into the abyss...😱
I just reread the rules on shove, you can basically shove a giant the size of a mountain down a hole without penalty as it stands for now,so ..... Yeah^^
I really like that damage has been scaled back. If I want to be a quick dagger wielding martial, I don’t have to feel like I’m sacrificing damage for flavour.
The Trident of Fixon 1st: If you aim it at the leg, it slows or trips If you aim it at the arm, it disarms If you aim at the head, it cause bleed or astonish If you describe you throw it, it gains thrown If you describe you wield it with two hands, it gains versatile If you describe you are careful when attacking, it gains guard. If the player describes none, it has no property. A weapon that's more powerful the more imaginative the player is.
I've been coming up with lots of ideas for how custom magic items work in the system. Most of the ideas I've had were very simple like the extra damage for heavy hits dealing a different kind of damage. But I could definitely see magic items that gain an additional weapon property beyond what they would normally be able to get.
I love your system so far, and what you are doing with it. The only things that I wish to come true is ability to get over attribute limit(so I can arm wrestle a giant as a dwarf, maybe through magic items, class features or epic boons) and heavily armored barbarian subclass(couse I like angry tin cans, like Guts).
I totally thought Trident = Guard + Toss then got stuck on Versatile being a genuine third option and couldn't figure out what I liked more. This is when I recognised the true strength in the flexibility of this system you've made. If you want to play with a weapon in a particular way that differs from "the norm" then your character can readily become that guy who utilises unorthodox methods in combat and may eventually become renowned for it.
The Klingon Bat'Leth would need a property "Looks Cooler Than It is" which causes others to want one, maybe something that adds Intimidation, but otherwise has no useful combat properties.
The sheer amount of love for the martial classes is so refreshing. Really appreciate all the stuff you can do for being in the melee mix. Thanks. It's looking great.
It doesn't really affect the mechanics, but did you get the names of the bull whip and chain whip backwards? Bull whips are commonly used with one hand, but most chain whips are heavier and longer so you need more room to wind up for a strike.
The trident (my favorite weapon) is built for locking an opponents weapon (and catching fish). I think you would need a condition for a weapon lock and then trait to make tridents better in the lock. There are several weapons like this for instance the parrying dagger. Edit: I was pretty close. *Guard* is definitely much simpler than a locking condition (though I still might try to make one.)
Alright i have a weird one here. If i want to make a spring loaded fist. I would put the reach and impact propreties for my two basic attributes. Then, i imagine this thing to need a reload after a hit, like cranking it for the next spring release, meaning two handed and reload propreties are required. Also it would be unwieldy, giving me a total of more 2 points to spend. Giving me enough wiggle room to take de heavy proprety. In the end i have a weapon that deals 3 damage normally and a potential 5 damage on a heavy hit. I know that melee weapon cant have the reload proprety as of now, but i mean... why not.
Yeah, I'd say blowguns should be the most silent weapon of all! I'd picture it as a less damaging kind of weapon as far as the projectile goes, but that could deliver debilitating poisons while staying unseen in the shadows. :)
@zTom_ I mean that's their current implementation in 0.7. It's Just annoying because the custom weapon thing is gonna make throwing knives the best because of the new sword style And the unseen part becomes ambiguous again
1. Returning does nothing? (unless the item is a powerful magic thrown weapon). You could just throw multiple weapons and save yourself a property. 2. Heavy costing 2 points makes heavy weapon proficiency nearly a net-0. After considering the 2 property cost it about breaks even with impact. And that’s before considering it locks you out of dual wielding. Martials should be able to wield stronger weapons than casters. If you want heavy to be balanced, then another route should be taken to make martial’s weapon proficiencies matter. 3. Thrown is actively detrimental. A “melee” weapon with thrown functions identically to a ranged weapon with no properties, except it has 2/3 the range. 4. Multifaceted is another underpowered property. The minor action it cost to swap a weapon if need be doesn’t compete with the other properties. Cool idea tho. 5. Guard makes light shields obsolete. 1 damage and an additional property is far more valuable than access to the raise shield maneuver. Even if guard is removed shields need their 1 damage back. A heavy shield with 1 damage and 2 pd is on par with a weapon. 6. Whip or spear passive on a ranged weapon would be broken. The easiest fix on the list! 7. (Not ab weapons) Defensive racial traits (and possibly other perks that are not coming to mind) not applying to heavy armor make light armor significantly stronger for anyone who is investing in defense. Which is again odd because heavy armor is the limited proficiency. I’m on the hype train for DC20 and all, but it seems like the comments are turning a blind eye to balance, bc of the excitement for customization. Excellent concept, but this weapon system feels like it needs a couple revisions.
Love the "Honed-In Sights" rule for crossbows. I wonder: would that also apply to primitive firearms like a flint-lock rifle? I'm thinking not because reloading a flintlock would require breaking your line of sight while setting it up for the next shot. But with a modern firearm, I'd think it *would* apply. Anyone have any thoughts on this? (I run a game that's less Renaissance and more Three Musketeers, so firearms are a thing.)
To me it would maybe make more sense for Ranged weapons to come by default with Ammo trait, and *that* trait being a +2. Simplifiies the whole unwieldy/two-handed thing, and is equivalent to the system presented. Only thing you could argue with this is then, what about ranged magic weapons that don't consume ammo? I'm not sure, maybe another trait that counters the ammo+2? We'd need a better look at how magic items work, for that argument.
If ranged weapon attack has unwieldy, wouldn't that make it double DisADV on attacks within 1 space. The rules already dictate DisADV on attacks within 1 space. Totally fine if that's what it is, just making sure.
@@subterranean327 that's a good question, maybe they'll rephrase it that "When you make an Spell Check with at least 1 hostile creature adjacent you have DisADV..." or something of that spirit. We'll have to ask on their Discord
I didn't see a "Light" property so I'm curious about Two Weapon Fighting. Can I wield any two weapons as long as they don't have Heavy or Two-Handed properties?
Hi there. I just realized that the whole weapon creation system could be heavily simplified by removing the weapon type (melee/ranged) and just adding a ranged property that costs 2 points. And for things like reload it could simply require the ranged property like throw requires toss. Or is there something I am missing?
This is very interesting! I’ve been thinking about weapons in trpgs for a while now, and so far I really like how this rework provides distinct options for each weapon while keeping balance in mind. The apparent ease of weapon customization is also exciting to see!
You should add a reload property for melee weapons that might be slightly different for them like -(2-4) to hit if not reloaded. The idea is creating a rocket powered weapon that when charged with like an oil phial is deadlier but out side of being charged is heavy/harder to wield. This may also be something that should instead be an exotic weapon that would be under magical weapon category. Image Reinheardt's hammer in overwatch or in monster hunter world the rocket powered greatsword (Wyvern Ignition Steel).
I just noticed an issue with versatile weapons that I had in D&D. The versatile property only benefits you while wielding it in 2 hands. I didn't like the duelling fighting style in D&D because it only benefitted the weapon in 1 hand. I think it takes away from the versatility. It would seem better to swap your versatile weapon for a different weapon while dual wielding or holding a shield. Can versatility have alternate effects for 1H/2H wielding? Versatile could work like multifaceted, but for properties instead of styles. You could get Guard while 1H and Impact (or the current +2 bonus) while 2H. You could even name the +2 bonus something else, like "Keen" or "Accurate", and make it into its own property.
I would swap the style passive effect for bow & crossbow. It’s almost impossible to keep your eye on the target when re-cocking a crossbow, but it’s easy to do that with a bow. So the crossbow ‘shooting same target’ makes no sense for a crossbow. But it would make sense that the bow wielder can keep their eye on the target.. crossbow, especially on second shot, would be able to more rapidly aim at a slowed target. Note: only suggesting that swap, no change to the underwater bit for xbow.
I've got to be honest, while the direction and intent are on the right path, the execution is getting dangerously close to making the same critical mistakes from previous editions. 4th edition had the "marker system" were players had different abilities that would trigger based on the markers applied to the enemies. This slowed down the game exponentially and made combat more of a choir than a fun and engaging experience. The conditions you proposed (dazed,hindered, exposed, etc) are not only too varied they are not logically sound, nor are they intuitive to remember. For instance: what is the difference between "exposed" and "hindered"? Shouldn't all the conditions be considered a hindrance? How is petrified a condition? shouldn't the opponent be out of the fight completely if they are turned to stone? Either the magic is extremely weak or by "prettified" do you actually mean "held"? Lastly, as a martial player, I am disappointed in the lack of creativity when it comes to the weapon styles. giving a simple +1 bonus to something already feels meaningless in the grand scheme of things, but also tying them a specific condition is going to cause the same exact effect that markers had in D&D (4e): Slower turns, increased player frustration, and more "Features" that both the martial players and the GM have to keep track of. This would be ok in a VTT, but not at a live table. Actual weapon bonuses should give more of a clear incentive for why someone would pick one over the others while also be reminiscent of their real life functions (even if vaguely so). EX: Crossbow bolts should ignore 2-3 points of defense due to their piercing effect. Light blades should cause bleeding or could cause it if the player rolls a natural 15+. Staffs could restore 1 extra point of stamina for martials or add damage equal to their combat modifier to certain maneuvers. Maybe it's because I've practiced martial arts for 25 years and studied game design but every time I see uninspired "Weapon styles" I just wonder why designers don't actually do research or ask someone who practices with these weapons to give them some advice. It feels like they are just "making it up on the fly" which does not inspire confidence in the final product
![Twenty One Pilots - The Line (from Arcane Season 2) [Official Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XCz7WUotXs8/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm very much a fan of the custom weapon system. Not just because of its intended usage, but because it shows us that the publisher is using their own Checks & Balances system.
Coach, much respect for being willing to balance by nerfing stuff. Balancing by only increasing power (so as not to upset anyone) can so quickly lead to bigger game problems. This is the good design that we want/need/love!
I disagree with crossbows “homing in their sights” due to the fact that you have to take them out of your sights in order to reload between every shot. I think bows and crossbows could be switched, with bows benefiting from getting the power, lead and trajectory dialed in for the next shot, and the crossbow befitting from a slowed target making their single shot easier to hit.
This makes more sense logically. Usually the game fantasy of crossbow is doing more damage and what people expect. But I don't think DC20 should necessarily be tied to that just because people expect that from other games.
Yes! 100% this. It pretty much addresses a narrative confusion for me.
This, this, this.
Bows you can pull the string back farther to get more power behind it. Crossbows should only be a set damage
Sounds like a decent change.
I wish there was something to make crossbows better for anyone behind cover.
With crossbows, you can wait all day until someone pops their head from cover before you shoot, but not with bows.
Yes! Hope he sees this and more people agree
"Hitting but dealing 0 damage doesn't feel weird right?" That's exactly how armour is supposed to be imagined, wearing plate mail doesn't make you better at dodging, it just means when you get hit, you aren't hurt by it because there's a solid steel plate between the weapon and your body.
I imagine baseline armor class as your basic dodge. So any damage that misses because of the armor your wearing (11 and up) i imagine it as glancing or deflecting off the armor.
That is SO well said!!!
The only issue I have with that is that that’s what the physical damage reduction system is supposed to do already. Make armor to where it will actually mechanically stop the damage of a 1 or 2 damage weapon and give that to all creatures who would have it, baking it into the weapon system takes a piece away from the armor system that should be there while also making the bolas as shown in this video not a damage option at all while being in the weapons category. It seems to me that all most all weapons, defiantly the bolas and maybe the net to do at least 1 damage and if the creature has armor that negates that then he’s fine.
@@thekinglygamer6375Since the game has heavy hits, raising your AC effectively does negate extra damage. If one character has AC of 13 and another has AC of 18, and they take different damage from an attack roll of 20.
But if you can deal 0 damage, that doesn't in any way take into account whether the target is armored/padded. A skinny caster (or civilian) dressed in pajamas can be hit with an attack that normally deals 0 damage and if those heavy hits don't add any bonus, that's 0 damage to a pajama wearing caster for a hit. That doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
Similarly I don't think it makes that much sense for a net attack to deal any damage through Heavy Hits. Unless the net edges are tied to some big rocks or something, this is an example of a game system that doesn't translate all too well to the physical realm.
If you want to reflect this armor philosophy then you should separate dodge AC from armor AC. So small and nimble rogues can dodge around and avoid attacks altogether, and the big hulking Knight/Fighter cannot dodge around due to the bulk of his armor, but he cannot feel any or much damage from many weapon attacks, with the exception of bludgeoning damage. But perhaps he would get tired from being subjected to repeated bashes from various weapons.
To be truthful to such a system you would basically need to break down damage from any source so every weapon or spell attack has some measure of X, Y, and Z damage. You could increase the complexity by adding an armor piercing stat. Parries could be separated into half-parry, where you lower the damage but still get hit, and full-parry, where you completely deflect/block the opponent's weapon swing and take no damage.
You can do soooo much to design a damage/armor (or extended to combat) system that is more truthful to realism.
And while it can be fun to engage in such a system if you really want to nerd it out, it becomes less fun for the less nerdy and more casual gamers who just want to see number against number, biggest one wins. Easy peezy, lets get going.
Love it, I used a weapon building system in 5e for years and years, and it looks nearly identical to what you have built. It’s so functional.
DC20 is literally D&D 6e
Yea, it's funny how many people have similar ideas but the big brands are too stiff to change their stuff so now the fans are coming up with their own 😄
Nice! You know it might just be me, but I feel like the weapon passives for the bow and crossbow could be switched. While I think hitting someone while Slowed would be easier with any ranged weapon, the higher rate of fire with a bow makes me think that adjusting your aim would be easier. Just food for thought.
Makes sense actually, considering you have to lower your crossbow to reload (usually)
Agreed. I can grab an arrow from a quiver without taking my eyes off a target. Reloading a crossbow is a little more attention intensive, lol.
Issue might be that you get more attacks with the bow, so that passive is easier to activate.
@LevTheLurker will you should get more attacks with the bow. A trained bowman can release attacks faster than a trained crossbowman. The issue is that the bow is a professional weapon, whereas the crossbow can be used by peasants with little training historically. Also, the crossbow does more damage because of the AP cost.
Also to add: since the crossbow requires AP to reload, you can only get off 2 shots per round (on average). The crossbow passive requires attacking the same creature, meaning you'll only get the +1 damage bonus once per turn (again on average). If the target required to be Slowed (or some other condition), then that condition can be set up on a previous turn to then followup with 2 attacks (+2 damage) on your next turn. Rapid-fire with the bow (+1 dmg attacking same target) means you could get up +3 dmg if you hit will all attacks, but would likely be in the +2 dmg range. Anyways, excited for game and I love the constant tinkering!
I'm happier with my decision to back DC20 with each video that comes out!
I am very happy with the direction that DC20 is going. Absolutely.
LOVE THIS! One of my first thoughts to critique, is to swap the placement of the weapon name (longsword) and the weapon style (sword)
When I look through this chart, I want to find a specific type of weapon, and the instinct to do that is to look on the far left
I am going to screen shot this and show it to my team... I said the same thing! LOL :) But yea we will keep looking for clarity points on how to best present things across the board, so thank you!
@@TheDungeonCoach great minds think alike my dude!
@@TheDungeonCoach I had the same thought initially. However when I thought more on the topic two things occurred to me:
1. Weapon identity in this system heavily leans into the chosen style and subsequent properties. With the current style names, the style almost represents the weapon better than the actual given name for a weapon. This is reflected by the fact there are instances where multiple different weapons can fall into the same style and property combination. It's worth noting that I think this is fantastic for clarity and helps it stand out from other systems, where they list multiple named weapons in a table that practically share the exact same mechanical properties but are spread out because they are listed alphabetically and it just clutters the table and wastes space on the page/screen.
2. Part of the problem with this instinct/intuition stems from the visual alignment of the terminology used in the table. First of all, while "Style" is listed at the top (rightly so) because it is overall most important, but then you have "Melee Weapons" underneath it and "One Handed" underneath that, your intuition is that names of "One Handed Melee Weapons" will be in the same column. This is further exacerbated by the fact "Type" is the systems terminology for distinguishing "Melee/Ranged" but is then the header for the column above the given names of weapons. Once you realise what is going on though, it actually becomes easier to associate the important cells of the table with the weapon names because the important data is immediately left and right. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen players read tables incorrectly, (particularly when late night gaming and their tired) eyes look at the far left of the table for the object they need but then accidentally shift up or down a row when looking to the far right for the property.
There's a couple solutions to this, but central to the problem is standardisation of terminology. By having One Handed, Versatile, Two-Handed for melee and then Bow and Crossbow for ranged as subheadings, particularly placed in the "style" column, it causes confusion and gives more weight to the terms as unique identifiers, distinguished from the same terms used in the properties column. Moreover One Handed isn't even a named property since it is the default for melee type weapons and the "type" label for a column undermines this further by stripping away the terms meaning from distinguishing melee and ranged weapons.
I would recommend having title columns left to right as:
Style | Examples/Weapons | Properties | Damage
Then a title row underneath that reads:
Type: Melee/Ranged/Special
You could then further use sub-title rows for One Handed, Versatile and Two-Handed but the alignment should be over the Properties column, which may look bizarre but it will enhance clarity. Arguably you could just remove the sub-title rows entirely and just ensure that Versatile and Two-Handed are the first properties listed in their column so it is clear that the styles are sorted alphabetically but grouped by these two key properties. You also don't really need subheadings for the bow and crossbow weapons due to them being grouped by the styles.
An alternative option is to move the styles to switch the style and example columns and then rename all of the styles, but that would not only be more work, it would probably also reduce clarity of the mechanics intent and reduce the importance of a weapon styles representation of the weapon.
To the Dungeon Coach and team: Some ideas for more weapon properties:
1. Balanced. +1 to hit. Costs 1 point.
2. Un-Balanced. -1 to hit. Costs -1 point.
3. Extra sharp. Critical strike on a 19 instead of a 20. Costs 1 point. (Or maybe 2?)
4. Lightweight. Can be drawn without using a minor action. Costs 1 point. (Making a javelin with lightweight and toss, to quickly toss 2 javelins then draw you normal weapon using minor action)
5. Huge. Normal attack cost 2AP instead of 1AP. (Give it +1 or even +2 damage and a cost of 0 to maybe -1) (Perfect for making a HUGE warhammer to clobber your foes!)
6. Parry. Whenever you take the "Parry maneuver" grant a +7 to PD instead of +5 to PD. Costs 1
7. Pierce/Impale. Stab 2 enemies standing in line. Costs 2 point. (or 1?) (That could also be a maneuver in itself)
Edit for more properties ideas!
8. Encumbrance. -1 Speed when wielding the weapon. Costs -2 points.
9. Super Critical. Critical hits give +2 damage. (total of 4 in the current system) Costs 2 points.
10. Armor Piercing. Ignore resistance to damage type. OR ignores Personal Damage reduction at normal hits. Costs 1 (or 2?) points.
11. Channeling. Gives +1 to Spellattacks when wielding this weapon. Costs 2 points. (So a wizard can make a staff with: Unwieldy, guard, and channeling for a +1 to PD and Spell attack)
For nº 5 you could just put the "reload" property to a melee weapon. 1AP to "load" (lift the weapon) and another AP to strike
These are some great ideas to add. Hope he sees it
I'm cool with all of these except no. 4
Don't agree with all the ideas, but there are some good ones there.
@@lucasgoulart7856 Oh! That way if you have one "leftover" AP from the last round, you can use it to lift up your weapon, preparing to strike next round for only 1AP
Closing the martial / caster divide... one DC20 video at a time.
In this case lowering the martials to be in line with the casters lol!
I can very well see the 0 base dmg "weapons" work for things that aren't made primarily to harm others (improvised weapons, shields, unarmed attacks), but they still do hurt if:
1) You deal a heavy hit. Just too good of a strike.
2) You know what are you doing (i.e. monk with bare fists, ruffian-type rogue with an improvised weapon).
3) You use some on-hit delivery system (i.e. a raging barbarian deals more damage on hit or you can use some techniques/maneuvers like grappling attack that grapples (and possibly initiates strangling) on hit, but still damages only on a Heavy).
This also opens fun options with improvised weapons: Take a situation where a pub brawl starts and your fighter takes a table leg and starts whacking others with it. I can see the table leg being a 0 dmg weapon with Versatile and Impact properties - it doesn't hit as hard as a war club (duh), but you can still wield it quite effectively with the general fighter options (I mean, tripping 'em with the table leg is a time-honored pub brawl option) and once you get that Heavy hit, it actually harms someone rather dangerously.
New video and so close to breaking the $1.7 million stretch goal!
1.7 million achieved 😊
Looks very fun to play around with custom weapons! I've definitely run into some issues with D&D weapons before not covering exactly what I was looking for. I paused to take a stab at a trident before listening to your suggestions. Spear with Toss + Impact (thinking maybe the extra prongs can give it the potential for a nastier wound than your standard spear) OR with Toss + Versatile (mostly because I think the extra prongs should help make it more likely to hit in many cases). However, there is a Korean trident called a dangpa that is used defensively, to trap your enemy's weapon between the prongs, so another trident option is a Spear with Guard (and maybe Versatile based on the limited info I can find saying it could be used 1- or 2-handed). Sounds like we had similar thoughts :)
I cannot wait until this project fully drops. I'll still play D&D but man... I want this thing to be polished so I can run it for my friends!
Had my first game the other day. It was the GM's second time GMing anything. It went how you'd expect but so much smoother than if it were a DnD game.
Hey Coach I'm back! Glad to see you released on Kickstarter! I'm a bit behind you, but I'm happy with your progress! I had some constructive feedback here, and maybe a hot take at the same time haha, but here goes: Cantrips should NOT deal as much damage as martials do, period, ever. Spells should be stronger than melee in my opinion, but only at a significant cost. In my game system I have scaling weapons and spells, spells cost mana (up to 10 at the moment), and the lower 1 mana cost spells deal about as much as a common quality single handed weapon, while 2 mana cost spells are about a common quality two handed weapon. The draw of magic is the ability to affect multiple targets by default, to affect the mind and the battlefield, and yes at higher mana cost, devastate enemies. I'm proud of you for sticking it out and getting it released sir! If you ever want to theory craft, let me know.
The gift that keeps on giving 😼Can't wait for 0.8!
"Throw the DC20 hat in the ring." People... DC20 is literally just more geared to BE FUN to play than 5.5e imo. I know not all feel that way but the Kickstarter makes it clear that MANY do.
I mean many also find dnd to be fun... I mean just look at like 1 billion players it has
@@ДюсековИльясit's ok but what D&D really has going for it is brand recognition. People will call TTRPGs "D&D", like how Kleenex and Band-aid are brand names that are used more often than tissue or bandage.
There are so many better TTRPGs out there but people only really hear D&D and probably assume it's either the best (because of popularity) or the only option.
@@ДюсековИльяс it's also firmly established, its going to have lots of players.
@@ДюсековИльясbut which system has more engaging combat out of the box? Dc20 every day of the week. There is a reason every DNDtuber has a "how to speed up your DND combat" video.
Engaging combat is THE thing players care about in these games. If you care more about story/narrative, there are far better games for that.
A significant amount of 5e players are like Dragonball fans. They stepped to the entrance of the gateway to anime and will just stay there even if objectively better things are deeper inside because it's all they know.
@@ДюсековИльясnot saying it isnt fun but he has some room to be alot better and more fun. Plus look how long dnd has been around and how long it has dominated the scene. It’s time for something fresh and exciting and outside the box
Gotta love the inclusion of the meteor hammer! Though @15:29 that is in fact a rope dart, similar flexible weapon, as much fun to play with! The main difference is that the meteor is bludgeoning and the rope dart is piercing, leading to the meteor hammer working horizontally, whereas the rope dart is more on the verticallity and shooting to hit the target straight instead of slamming around.
Was hoping there was a new video soon. DC20 update people!
Less than 3k until the Kickstarter hits 1.7 mill. Got the special edition because I'm so excited for this game! Anyone watching please join the West Marches so I can run a game for you!
Every time you make a big change like this, at first I'm unsure about it, but then the more I think about it the better it is. Also I think a 0 damage shield bash could be great. You use your shield and the trip maneuver to knock an enemy down, and then since it's technically dual wielding you can make a main weapon attack at advantage without a MCP. Keep up the good work!
I think it is a bit clunky to spent several paragraphs on saying that both weapon types (melee and ranged) start with 2 points, and ranged also gain ammo, unwieldy and two-handed properties/flaws without gaining the property points for it, but you can use your properties to remove those "forced" flaws, except ammo.
Sorry, too many hoops for my tired mind.
Wouldn't it be shorter/less confusing to say:
Melee weapons start with 2 property points.
Ranged weapons start with 0 property points and always carry the ammo property.
Tip: You can add flaws to your weapon to gain more PP.
Love this! Already got some inspiration:
Ranged Ranger (maybe Fighter?), but still using Might as Prime.
They have a MASSIVE heavy bow they designed themselves. Added Heavy and Reload to the standard Ranged Weapon setup to build the concept weapon. Think like the Orc in LOTR that was shooting Boromir. Doesn't shoot far, but it PUNCHES what's in range!
Fantastic update. I'm impressed. Simple and versatile yet still balanced and interesting. I love it! Well done.
Totally making a greatsword with the 2 handed, unwieldy, heavy, impact, reach, and guard properties.
"That thing was too big to be called a sword. Too big, too thick, too heavy, and too rough, it was more like a large hunk of iron."
Edit: Just got to the point where heavy costs 2 points. Maybe it could reduced to 1 cost since weapon damage has been nerfed and it requires a negative property to use? Or perhaps if a melee weapon take both the negative properties allow 3 bonus points to compensate? I want to make the dragon slayer haha.
I understand that Martials needed nerfs, and to summarize:
- Weapon maneuvers are removed, which were mostly 1 AP for +1 damage and a rider-effect like inflict a condition. We already have the Power Maneuver to add +1 damage for 1 AP, so the weapon maneuver was the Power Maneuver + rider.
Seeing how many martial classes start with 2-4 weapons, this also removes 2-4 maneuvers as options during combat. Perhaps we will see an increase in the numbers of Maneuvers you can select at level 1 and over the levels. Hopefully they get some of that flexibility/utility back.
- Some weapon maneuvers returns as regular maneuvers but without the damage bonus.
- Weapon styles remain largely the same, but some nerfs/buffs are applied. For instance Axes used to deal +1 damage to Bloodied (
And with this update my major concern with DC20 has been fixed. Great work!
So excited to try out the new weapon system. Not having specific weapon maneuvers will make it a bit less intimidating for new players. So grateful for all you and your team do. This system is jewel for creative types, and for encouraging others to get creative.
In that weapon builder, you should also put in a dropdown menu for picking weapon types.
I'm very much looking forward to customizing my own weapons! It's a thing in other games I've played, but this looks more streamlined, efficient, and balanced.
I AM SO EXCITED!! 2 DIFFERENT FRIEND GROUPS HAVE AGREED TO PLAY THE ONE SHOT, and I am *biding my time*
Digging the power balance update. Feels much more "I can kill stuff, you can kill stuff, and we should work together because we're all in danger". Never got that feeling with the system that shall not be named.
Absolutely fantastic update. I'm so excited to not just "reflavor" a weapon but fully customize a weapon exactly how I want.
The balance of caster vs martials is something that leaves me a bit worried now, because yes martials felt a little bit better than spellcasters, but this is levels 1 and 2 we are talking so I just asumed casters would be better at later levels (just not as big of a gap as dnd)
Hey Alan! I’m so happy that this has been so successful. I am a teacher with a young son too and it has been so heart warming to see you be successful. You’re living the dream man and can’t wait to see how this all evolves.
Yes dude! Yes! Custom weapon system! Honestly so hyped, ready for to get this beta in my hands! Keep it up coach LOVE the direction you and the team are taking the system!
No more weapon maneuvers? Probably for the best. 3 attack maneuvers + 4 selected maneuvers + WEAPON maneuvers was way too much for lvl 1 martial characters. Good stuff here!
Casters in 5e get like 9 known spells/cantrips at level 1, I fail to see how this is overwhelming.
it is kinda expected that casters are a bit more complicated anyway but not all martials should be like that, and I agree that it was too many options for the people I tried to introduce to the system, so I made them select a few anyway and they still felt they had waaay more freedom to do stuff vs 5e
@@elneos6343 I believe the key here is optional limitation. For 5e you also get suggested spell selections for casters for those who just want to get moving. For those who can stomach it, they can browse, then choose and pick.
I would rather the DC20 core book make some suggestions on the maneuvers to take (Expose, Hinder, Parry, and then Raise Shield/Trip - all being very well-rounded and good), and advice GMs to allow postponing selecting maneuvers until the player has had a little more experience with combat and the game system - they already have the Attack Maneuvers to try it out. That may also make clear for the player what they actually need/want for combat. Of course you shouldn't add new maneuvers during combat or anytime during action of a game session, but during rest or between sessions seems appropriate.
Huh... I didn't actually realize how many weapons you're set to start with and expected it was similar to 5e where 1 type is common and 2 is possible, with 3 being near impossible - meaning Weapon Maneuvers would normally only add +1-2 additional maneuvers to take into account. For DC20 your martials are more likely to start with between 2 and 4 weapon types, with a weight towards the lower end. Regardless I find it okay to remove Weapon Maneuvers. However seeing how some are simply transferred to regular maneuvers, I would like to see the amount of maneuvers gained over levels (and possibly at level 1) increase. It is after all options and not bonuses, so it should be somewhat equated to spell repertoire where a level 1 caster starts with 3 cantrips and 4 spells and a bunch of level 1 class features (looking at you Druid).
@@ghoulkinggruul7345 casters in 5e only get to make 2 levelled spells per rest, the rest is cantrips. maneuvers are always available
This isnt 5e so not sure why you're comparing the two as they're different systems.
@@ghoulkinggruul7345
Okay, kinda sad you had to remove the old maneouvres, but I am LOVING the changes to the styles and properties! And you actually gave me an incentive to grab a whip and enjoy doing so. Kudos on that!
Keep it awesome, Coach. This is a turn in the right direction and it feels awesome.
That is nothing short of gorgeous! I am so excited about those customization possibilities that´s just what players will love💯
So excited for the Kickstarter!
A WEAPON ANCESTRY SYSTEM?? I’m in!
Thought the same thing 😂 its very nice!!
I love this! But i have 3 thoughts
1. Crossbows should have a set damage rather than the property it has. But in DC20 its not just about damage or aim, its both in one roll.
So you could have this property on a light or hand crossbow, but doesn't on bigger/heavier ones like the heavy crossbow, you have to move the crossbow itself to reload. But because its a crossbow your aim is thrown off but your damage is still the same, the sling is still pulled back in the same position.
I think this should be moved to the bows because bows are more about the feel of firing an arrow, more you do it the better you can feel out where your target is.
Then again, with heavier/bigger crossbows, you might be required to set it up to fire. Like a bi-stand or something to keep it in place. So maybe it should be another property just for crossbows. A way to place your crossbow, becoming improvable and requireing an action to pick it up, but gives it that bonus 1 dmg. BUT i think it should have a prerequisite of something. Heavy is to expensive so maybe something else like unwieldy?
2. I love the 0 dmg idea so much! Honestly I'd love a property on blunt or slashing wrapons where the base damage is 0 but heavy or brutal hits are a +2 or 3 respectively. Just to see this feature in more options would be cool. (Or maybe a magic weapon!!)
3. The whole 0 dmg thing made me remember and miss your old armor HB dnd video. Having the difference between agility making your AC then your armor AC then a range in-between where damage is halfed. I took that idea and ran with it! Not anything to note here, just wanted to reminisce on the time before DC20 and how far this community has come.
I absolutely thought 'nerfing' martials was a bad idea until you explained that it levels the playing field, at least starting out... and that's beautiful because now is the time to make those kinds of adjustments! GREAT work!
Just backed DC20 today. Super excited to get to play this for myself; hoping it hits 2mil for those new acestries!
Beautiful system. How you always arrive at the duality with your systems is impressive.
Dude. I'm such a fan of shadiversity and the shword concept (shield+sword), with this system is TOTALLY DOABLE!!!
It's a really big sword that has handles o the side to make it easier to block attacks and protect your body. So you can make it with the properties of two handed(-1), heavy(+2), and guard(+1). Maybe take into account that is big so take reach(+1) and unwieldy(-1). My god this man makes pure gold material to play with
This is great, Coach, but now I need a version for building Vestiges of Divergence.
I notice there is no light property. I guess the concession is that lighter weapons still do the same damage, but in picking up properties associated with light weapons (concealed, thrown) that you miss out on taking other properties like impact.
It does make me wonder if there is going to be some changes to how dual wielding works though.
Recommend renaming the 'Heavy' weapon property, or switching Impact and Heavy. I can immediately predict confusion issues with 'Wait, the Heavy property isn't related to Heavy Hits?'
Ooooo that is a GREAT point! Hmmmm well said!
@@TheDungeonCoach Seeing how the properties are actually used, I do like Impact for what you're going for, so renaming Heavy is the better move. Impact feels good, it feels solid, and it really evokes the idea of 'this weapon can sometimes hit harder. It has a good Impact.' I think a better word for the 'Heavy' property would actually be 'Strong.'
Seeing 'Heavy' makes me think weighty, two-handed, unwieldy, etc. People coming from DnD will get tricked as well, because there it's a strictly negative property that gives disadvantage for Small characters. Everybody gets 'Strong' though. At a glance, you know that means this weapon is a good weapon. It's Strong. Why does it do 2 damage? Cause it's Strong.
@@RyoWolf maybe weighted property.
@@RyoWolf perhaps 'Reinforced'?
How about hefty?
Good stuff!
Really curious how shields, unarmed strikes, natural weapons, and monk's iron palm feature fit into this.
I LOVE the rework and the amazing quality of this video. Each version just gets better and better :D
I feel like it was fine for melee weapons to deal more damage than cantrips because (most) cantrips are ranged
Most combat maneuvers like Shoving, grappling etc can only be used against enemies 0 - 2 size categories greater then youself, but how awesome would it be if instead of not being possible, istead the dc would rise by 5 for each size category, could be the" same " for huge creatures shoving smaller enemies, but only starting to reduce the dc at 2 size categories
Just imagine the medium barbarian getting all the buffs to hopefully shove the massive fire giant down into the abyss to avoid a tpk. The cliff is 1 space away, normally you would need a 20 to shove him down, but he is just so freakin huge, the downed rogue uses his action for a help die,the bloodied cleric casts bless(+2mp to increase it to 1d6). the lvl 4 barbarian uses 1 ap to give himself advantage to shove the giant(+adv for rage?). He rolls now with 3d20+ ~5?+1d8 helpdice+1d6 bless and everyone prays that he somehow manages to get a 30 and push the giant this one tiny space down into the abyss...😱
I just reread the rules on shove, you can basically shove a giant the size of a mountain down a hole without penalty as it stands for now,so ..... Yeah^^
I really like that damage has been scaled back. If I want to be a quick dagger wielding martial, I don’t have to feel like I’m sacrificing damage for flavour.
The Trident of Fixon 1st:
If you aim it at the leg, it slows or trips
If you aim it at the arm, it disarms
If you aim at the head, it cause bleed or astonish
If you describe you throw it, it gains thrown
If you describe you wield it with two hands, it gains versatile
If you describe you are careful when attacking, it gains guard.
If the player describes none, it has no property.
A weapon that's more powerful the more imaginative the player is.
I expected the blow darts to deal 0 damage, but have poison options. Or maybe to deal 1 poison damage instead of piercing.
I've been coming up with lots of ideas for how custom magic items work in the system. Most of the ideas I've had were very simple like the extra damage for heavy hits dealing a different kind of damage. But I could definitely see magic items that gain an additional weapon property beyond what they would normally be able to get.
I hope your family and you are enjoying this journey. I never played DnD because it seemed too confusing. I'm excited to play this.
I love your system so far, and what you are doing with it.
The only things that I wish to come true is ability to get over attribute limit(so I can arm wrestle a giant as a dwarf, maybe through magic items, class features or epic boons) and heavily armored barbarian subclass(couse I like angry tin cans, like Guts).
I totally thought Trident = Guard + Toss then got stuck on Versatile being a genuine third option and couldn't figure out what I liked more. This is when I recognised the true strength in the flexibility of this system you've made. If you want to play with a weapon in a particular way that differs from "the norm" then your character can readily become that guy who utilises unorthodox methods in combat and may eventually become renowned for it.
I absolutely love every part of this comment! Thank you for that
The Klingon Bat'Leth would need a property "Looks Cooler Than It is" which causes others to want one, maybe something that adds Intimidation, but otherwise has no useful combat properties.
So much of DC20 are things I've used in my own homebrew content. As the forever-GM, the system just makes sense.
Hoping to see a similar system for Armor! Point system is just so intuitive.
Hey seeing this made me think of a class that has weapon mastery meaning it could give you an extra point into your weapons to make it even better
I've been thinking that weapons were in need of a rebalancing. 😊
Love what I’m seeing! Can’t wait to give this a play!! (Thanks for making RPG rules fun again Coach!)
I really like the idea of balancing everything with values.
Awesome. Made a character in 0.7 who uses the old Gauntlet weapon so going to figure out which traits to choose with these new rules.
The sheer amount of love for the martial classes is so refreshing. Really appreciate all the stuff you can do for being in the melee mix. Thanks. It's looking great.
Love DC20!
NEW DC20 VID LETS GOOOOOO
It doesn't really affect the mechanics, but did you get the names of the bull whip and chain whip backwards? Bull whips are commonly used with one hand, but most chain whips are heavier and longer so you need more room to wind up for a strike.
Oooooo just in time for our first \ next combat!
I really like the low numbers and the weapons are really balanced with one another making any pick viable
Loved the balancing and weapon creation system. Can't wait for beta!!!
The multi-facet weapon customization is very creative! 🔥
The trident (my favorite weapon) is built for locking an opponents weapon (and catching fish). I think you would need a condition for a weapon lock and then trait to make tridents better in the lock. There are several weapons like this for instance the parrying dagger.
Edit: I was pretty close. *Guard* is definitely much simpler than a locking condition (though I still might try to make one.)
Also sais like what Raphael from TMNT uses, I do think "weapon lock" should be some kind of property.
God I love this "BuildABear" concept you have in DC20! (Ancestries, Spells, and now Weapons!) My mind is already making loads of weapons!
Excited to play this new version, the team really cooked with this one!
I'm curious will we see nerfs to the damage of Monk's unarmed strikes and Beastborn's natural weapons in correspondence with this?
Alright i have a weird one here. If i want to make a spring loaded fist. I would put the reach and impact propreties for my two basic attributes. Then, i imagine this thing to need a reload after a hit, like cranking it for the next spring release, meaning two handed and reload propreties are required. Also it would be unwieldy, giving me a total of more 2 points to spend. Giving me enough wiggle room to take de heavy proprety. In the end i have a weapon that deals 3 damage normally and a potential 5 damage on a heavy hit. I know that melee weapon cant have the reload proprety as of now, but i mean... why not.
Nooo my blowgun! Whatve they done to you! No more unseen attacks! Nooo!
Yeah, I'd say blowguns should be the most silent weapon of all!
I'd picture it as a less damaging kind of weapon as far as the projectile goes, but that could deliver debilitating poisons while staying unseen in the shadows. :)
@zTom_ I mean that's their current implementation in 0.7. It's Just annoying because the custom weapon thing is gonna make throwing knives the best because of the new sword style
And the unseen part becomes ambiguous again
1. Returning does nothing? (unless the item is a powerful magic thrown weapon). You could just throw multiple weapons and save yourself a property.
2. Heavy costing 2 points makes heavy weapon proficiency nearly a net-0. After considering the 2 property cost it about breaks even with impact. And that’s before considering it locks you out of dual wielding. Martials should be able to wield stronger weapons than casters. If you want heavy to be balanced, then another route should be taken to make martial’s weapon proficiencies matter.
3. Thrown is actively detrimental. A “melee” weapon with thrown functions identically to a ranged weapon with no properties, except it has 2/3 the range.
4. Multifaceted is another underpowered property. The minor action it cost to swap a weapon if need be doesn’t compete with the other properties. Cool idea tho.
5. Guard makes light shields obsolete. 1 damage and an additional property is far more valuable than access to the raise shield maneuver. Even if guard is removed shields need their 1 damage back. A heavy shield with 1 damage and 2 pd is on par with a weapon.
6. Whip or spear passive on a ranged weapon would be broken. The easiest fix on the list!
7. (Not ab weapons) Defensive racial traits (and possibly other perks that are not coming to mind) not applying to heavy armor make light armor significantly stronger for anyone who is investing in defense. Which is again odd because heavy armor is the limited proficiency.
I’m on the hype train for DC20 and all, but it seems like the comments are turning a blind eye to balance, bc of the excitement for customization. Excellent concept, but this weapon system feels like it needs a couple revisions.
One week to go, nearly $1.7 million raised (so far!). Congratulations, thank you, and looking forward to trying the beta with my group!
Love the "Honed-In Sights" rule for crossbows. I wonder: would that also apply to primitive firearms like a flint-lock rifle? I'm thinking not because reloading a flintlock would require breaking your line of sight while setting it up for the next shot. But with a modern firearm, I'd think it *would* apply.
Anyone have any thoughts on this?
(I run a game that's less Renaissance and more Three Musketeers, so firearms are a thing.)
To me it would maybe make more sense for Ranged weapons to come by default with Ammo trait, and *that* trait being a +2. Simplifiies the whole unwieldy/two-handed thing, and is equivalent to the system presented.
Only thing you could argue with this is then, what about ranged magic weapons that don't consume ammo? I'm not sure, maybe another trait that counters the ammo+2? We'd need a better look at how magic items work, for that argument.
If ranged weapon attack has unwieldy, wouldn't that make it double DisADV on attacks within 1 space. The rules already dictate DisADV on attacks within 1 space. Totally fine if that's what it is, just making sure.
I don't think so, it would be too much lol.
Probably moved that general statement and made it a weapon property
@@GutisFive But what about ranged spell attacks then?
@@subterranean327 that's a good question, maybe they'll rephrase it that "When you make an Spell Check with at least 1 hostile creature adjacent you have DisADV..." or something of that spirit.
We'll have to ask on their Discord
Weapons are so important to martial characters, and I’m so glad to see someone give them some love!
I didn't see a "Light" property so I'm curious about Two Weapon Fighting. Can I wield any two weapons as long as they don't have Heavy or Two-Handed properties?
Love how you made the choice between short bow and long bow and Actual choice. Love what you did there.
One more week till the beta 🥳🎉
I wonder if there would be any fantastical materials (adamantium, mithril, etc.) That could count towards one of the properties
Keep up the great work Coach! 💜
Hi there. I just realized that the whole weapon creation system could be heavily simplified by removing the weapon type (melee/ranged) and just adding a ranged property that costs 2 points.
And for things like reload it could simply require the ranged property like throw requires toss.
Or is there something I am missing?
Nope, was wondering why it wasn’t this way as well.
This is very interesting! I’ve been thinking about weapons in trpgs for a while now, and so far I really like how this rework provides distinct options for each weapon while keeping balance in mind.
The apparent ease of weapon customization is also exciting to see!
Love DC20!!! Its so versatile!! this weekend I ran a sci-fi one-shot just reskinning the appearance of things and had a blast!!
You should add a reload property for melee weapons that might be slightly different for them like -(2-4) to hit if not reloaded. The idea is creating a rocket powered weapon that when charged with like an oil phial is deadlier but out side of being charged is heavy/harder to wield. This may also be something that should instead be an exotic weapon that would be under magical weapon category. Image Reinheardt's hammer in overwatch or in monster hunter world the rocket powered greatsword (Wyvern Ignition Steel).
Also note I like the less dmg change because I was a little afraid stuff was getting one shot to much in the small one shot campaigns videos.
I just noticed an issue with versatile weapons that I had in D&D. The versatile property only benefits you while wielding it in 2 hands. I didn't like the duelling fighting style in D&D because it only benefitted the weapon in 1 hand. I think it takes away from the versatility. It would seem better to swap your versatile weapon for a different weapon while dual wielding or holding a shield.
Can versatility have alternate effects for 1H/2H wielding? Versatile could work like multifaceted, but for properties instead of styles. You could get Guard while 1H and Impact (or the current +2 bonus) while 2H. You could even name the +2 bonus something else, like "Keen" or "Accurate", and make it into its own property.
I would swap the style passive effect for bow & crossbow. It’s almost impossible to keep your eye on the target when re-cocking a crossbow, but it’s easy to do that with a bow. So the crossbow ‘shooting same target’ makes no sense for a crossbow. But it would make sense that the bow wielder can keep their eye on the target.. crossbow, especially on second shot, would be able to more rapidly aim at a slowed target.
Note: only suggesting that swap, no change to the underwater bit for xbow.
I've got to be honest, while the direction and intent are on the right path, the execution is getting dangerously close to making the same critical mistakes from previous editions.
4th edition had the "marker system" were players had different abilities that would trigger based on the markers applied to the enemies. This slowed down the game exponentially and made combat more of a choir than a fun and engaging experience.
The conditions you proposed (dazed,hindered, exposed, etc) are not only too varied they are not logically sound, nor are they intuitive to remember. For instance: what is the difference between "exposed" and "hindered"? Shouldn't all the conditions be considered a hindrance? How is petrified a condition? shouldn't the opponent be out of the fight completely if they are turned to stone? Either the magic is extremely weak or by "prettified" do you actually mean "held"?
Lastly, as a martial player, I am disappointed in the lack of creativity when it comes to the weapon styles. giving a simple +1 bonus to something already feels meaningless in the grand scheme of things, but also tying them a specific condition is going to cause the same exact effect that markers had in D&D (4e): Slower turns, increased player frustration, and more "Features" that both the martial players and the GM have to keep track of. This would be ok in a VTT, but not at a live table.
Actual weapon bonuses should give more of a clear incentive for why someone would pick one over the others while also be reminiscent of their real life functions (even if vaguely so).
EX: Crossbow bolts should ignore 2-3 points of defense due to their piercing effect. Light blades should cause bleeding or could cause it if the player rolls a natural 15+. Staffs could restore 1 extra point of stamina for martials or add damage equal to their combat modifier to certain maneuvers.
Maybe it's because I've practiced martial arts for 25 years and studied game design but every time I see uninspired "Weapon styles" I just wonder why designers don't actually do research or ask someone who practices with these weapons to give them some advice. It feels like they are just "making it up on the fly" which does not inspire confidence in the final product
Mahnoovahs! What are you? A tank commander!