Check out Czepeku! / czepeku We're Live on Twitch! / blaine_simple Say hi and come play some D&D! All my other socials! linktr.ee/blainesimple Edited by Kameron! @KameronTV
We're Live on Twitch! www.twitch.tv/blaine_simple *Updates!* * You can actually force feed healing potions to downed character. You still can't throw them to heal people, though. * Critical hits also affect death saves by bringing up back to 1 hp, and also double the damage dice for attacks. I was mostly referring to how critical ability checks aren't official, but glanced over the extra effect on damage rolls. * Clerics were only locked into being one alignment tick off from their god in older editions! * Rest variants are actually another obscure rule from the DMG! It's essentially forgotten about though, and more often homebrewed than utilized, but it's there!
Most people aren't ignoring components, every caster class starts with either a focus or a component pouch suitable for their class. Except rangers, who seemingly don't have a focus for their class unless you use the optional rule that lets them use a druidic focus. "Casting some spells requires particular objects, specified in parentheses in the component entry. A character can use a component pouch or a spellcasting focus (found in chapter 5) in place of the components specified for a spell. But if a cost is indicated for a component, a character must have that specific component before he or she can cast the spell." -phb chapter 10, 'components'
the dmg and phb does specify you can adminster a potion to a creature with as action, and it doesn't specify the creature needs to be conscious. sure you cannot throw them on them to simply get them back up, but you can adminster them when your allies are down.
Exactly. Potions, as a general rule, are _literally liquid magic._ Why "should" they be restricted to such mundane biological concepts as "digestion"? You just have to unambiguously get the potion fluid "inside the body" of the person you're trying to use it on (huh, homebrew potential for a combat medic with a syringe crossbow inflicting injected potion effects?)...
3:50 The components aren't random; they're references to how certain effects are made in reality, idioms, or magic tricks. Fireball requires bat poop and sulfur, common ingredients in simple explosives. Detect Thoughts uses a copper piece to play on "A penny for your thoughts." Lightning Bolt uses fur and amber to generate static electricity. And so on.
To correct you on clerics, they had to be within one-step away from their deity's alignment, not that they had to be good. A better example would be 3.5 having bards/barbarians needing to be anything but lawful and druids having to be neutral somewhere on their alignment. Oddly enough, rogues had no such restrictions.
Pathfinder's Gray Paladins where nice for this reason. Had to be a good god, but you could be Neutral or Chaotic. Or even Lawful Neutral, with the right God.
In regards to reviving a downed party member with a potion. It is, in fact, possible to force feed liquids to an unconscious person, so pouring a healing potion down the throat of an unconscious party member would work (in my experience, apart from BG3, giving a downed party member a healing potion requires being in an adjacent space). Also, the rules state that a potion can be administered to another creature and does not specify that the creature must not be unconscious.
And that's not counting the fact that in DnD, potions are magical in nature. So they wouldn't need to go through your whole digestive tract to be effective
@@ofnir123 ^ This. Also iirc the description of a Potion of Healing states that drinking or *administering* a potion takes an Action. Administering doesn't necassairy mean feeding. It can also mean just pouring the damn thing over someone. XD
On the first one about nat 1 & 20, "They just guarantee that some of your attack hit or miss" The rules do still state that you roll double the amount of damage dice. The way you said it makes it sound like a nat 20 on an attack gets no bonuses other than guaranteeing the hit. PHB chapter 9, Making an attack, Attack rolls: Rolling 1 or 20 Sometimes fate blesses or curses a combatant, causing the novice to hit and the veteran to miss. If the d20 roll for an attack is a 20, the attack hits regardless of any modifiers or the target’s AC. This is called a critical hit, which is explained later in this chapter. If the d20 roll for an attack is a 1, the attack misses regardless of any modifiers or the target’s AC. Later in the same chapter under damage and healing: Critical Hits When you score a critical hit, you get to roll extra dice for the attack’s damage against the target. Roll all of the attack’s damage dice twice and add them together. Then add any relevant modifiers as normal. To speed up play, you can roll all the damage dice at once.
Also, the vid just says "D&D", but it should be mentioned, this is only true for *5E* D&D. Critical hits and critical misses used to be more impactful in prior editions, mainly 3e and 3.5.
@@Niko__01 Good point. Though I feel like when the majority of people hear "D&D", their first thought would be 5E first, then think of other editions afterwards.
And you don’t need it, _so long as it’s not consumed_ The number of spells that actually do that below 5th level is like 4, and all of those are for balance concerns, eg Glyph of Warding.
Yeah, I can see requiring you to get components for consumables, but "you can't use that spell until you can find a place selling crystal balls"? Yeah, I'll just have them spend the gold when they get the spell and be done with it, thanks.
Also on the topic of Spellcasting Material Components, some forget the "which the spell consumes" note here and there. I remember thinking, if it had a gold cost, you expend the item regardless. Then I read the Sage Advice Compendium, and found out it has to say that an item is consumed in order to be consumed. Otherwise, you keep it and can use the costly component again and again.
In 5e... Spell Focus Item = Component Pouch... So unless it's money, consumed item, or artifacts. Then both of these items can forgo the Material stuff. Spell Focus ignores Material Costs and Component Pouch contains all Materials. Plus... You don't need a Free Hand to use both items because the Specific Rule gives you a Free Hand. Just remember that Semantics and Hand Gestures are not negated normally. This isn't like Dark Souls 1 where you had to hold a Staff separately from your other weapon or shield. And Paladins can put their Spell Focus on Shields. Turning their Shield into their Spell Focus.
Rest variants are actually a game option in the Dungeon Master's Guide. There are actually several optional rules in chapter 9 of the DMG, all of which read like some kind of homebrew rules. It's actually pretty wild; proficiency dice, plot points, and even additional abilities, honor and sanity. All things I've heard of, but thought were some homebrew rules that get passed around Reddit, I didn't think these were not only official rules options, but from CORE.
@@almondsai7214 I shared that with my party last night and the fighter got really excited. Good thing too, as we are currently fighting a horde of zombies.
2 mistakes on the critical rolls bit : firstly: they apply to death saving throws as well as attacks with nat 1 meaning 2 death saves and nat 20 meaning you heal 1 hp. Secondly: rolling nat 20 on an attack roll does more than just auto-hit, it also doubles the damage dice.
not to be a grammar nazi, but it should be noted, you are set to 1 hp on a nat 20 death save, you don't heal any. in cases like chill touch that prevent healing, you'd still get up at 1 hp because of the wording
@@SamLabbato You're wrong. Chapter 9: Combat - Healing details that healing is hit points "regained". Cure Wounds spell details target "regains" hit point. So, regain hit points = healing. And would ya look at that, right there in Death Saving Throws: "If you roll a 20 on the d20, you regain 1 hit point." EVEN IF you don't wanna subscribe to "regain" meaning healing, the actual wordage of Chill Touch is "it can't regain hit points" which matches that DST nat 20 "regains 1 hit point" - so either way, Chill Touch does, in fact, prevent nat 20 effect on DST.
@@almondsai7214 Funny enough, the dUltimate kickstarter from a few years ago is conceptually pretty close to a spherical d20 (as well as the other types of dice)... oh, and the Orbidice _literally are_ spherical d20s (and other kinds, but not all on the same die).
7:11 bg3 remade rule with getting up. revived characters loose ACTION for 1 turn, witch is much worser then just speed. most of classes cant do anything with bonus action only, and its good option against players who abuse thing with "fall, restore 1 hp, make attack , fall, again" (i forgot the name of it.)
Spell material components are fun. People are just scared of them because they assume it makes spellcasting a lot more complex, which it doesn't. The majority of spells don't consume the material so you just have to acquire the component one time and you're set from then on. Which means a small side trip to the arcane shop or searching around an area where you could reasonably find the material you need in the wilderness and that can lead to some fun roleplay. Not much difference from needing to be acquire weapons at a blacksmith when you think about it, weapons are like a material component to do melee attacks really.
Facts. To expand a little bit the spells description usually specifically includes the phrase “component is consumed” for applicable spells meaning as long as you have a spell component pouch you are good to go.
I have rarely seen DMs give a (deliberate) pass to casters not having the expensive components on hand. I've seen a DM who didn't know better allow a caster without the component to cast the spell, but when he went and looked it up, he put a stop to that. Getting the material component can sometimes be a mini-quest or a downtime activity all its own!
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 And anything that has a gp value. So you can't use an arcane focus to replace the 100 gp pearl required for _identify,_ for example. You need to get the pearl. Once you have it, you can cast _identify_ any time you have the spell slot, though. Or as a ritual.
@@segevstormlord3713 True... Also, Spell Scrolls can cast spells for free. Provided, that either an NPC or PC makes one. You already spent the materials, money, and time to craft a Spell Scroll. But no one will use a Spell Scroll.
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 Sure they will, as long as the spell is already in the wizard's spellbook. If not, it'll be used to put it there. But I've seen people use scrolls. Scrolls, for some reason, don't get saved quite the way potions do.
@@segevstormlord3713Probably just the way people think of them as resources. Scrolls, if not used for spell book copying, are seen as prepared spell slots beyond the normal pool. Potions are seen more as a lifeline or an ace in the hole. Plan C versus plan Z.
Critical nat 20 get double damage. Critical Hits When you score a critical hit, you get to roll extra dice for the attack’s damage against the target. Roll all of the attack’s damage dice twice and add them together. Then add any relevant modifiers as normal. To speed up play, you can roll all the damage dice at once. For example, if you score a critical hit with a dagger, roll 2d4 for the damage, rather than 1d4, and then add your relevant ability modifier. If the attack involves other damage dice, such as from the rogue’s Sneak Attack feature, you roll those dice twice as well.
I honestly am very glad that many DMs ignore the rule of "1 disadvantage cancels out all advantage and vice versa". Cause if your opponent is blinded, bound, and you sneak up on him for your ranged attack, it would je really stupid that you lose your advantage just because they are prone.
I never understood why people don't like spell components, especially for wizards. I had a 3e wizard ages ago, and I'd make sure to go out of my way to find the components for any new spells I learned then describe how he used it in casting the spell. I think my favorite was ice storm because we were in a frozen tundra some distance from a volcano, so he took some of the snow on the ground, melted it with his hands, then threw it, making it refreeze into shards before appearing over the enemies we were fighting and crashing down. Having to explain to one of the locals why I need bat shit was funny enough to also make it worth it honestly.
A simple amendment to flanking: a creature that is being flanked cannot gain advantage when flanking another. It logically makes perfect sense. You can still have a huge chain of flanking but if you leap at the end of the chain it makes it so that only those on the edges gain flanking advantage. It also adds combat depth to some extent. If a party member is being flanked, you can choose to hop on either end of the chain - this will let you flank one specific enemy but also mean the other one still gets advantage, or you could if possible position your character adjacent to both flankers and turn it into a 2-v-2 flank where nobody has advantage.
Long rest for a week is an official optional rule, and I'm not convinced about potions Also, undisclosed house rules are the worst. "You roll a nat 1, so you hit your ally... And this time you roll nat 1, but nothing happens, because it isn't dramatic." It was far from the worst game I had, but all that "I don't do rules, I do rulings, ask about everything" was just annoying
@@RositaDepre I don't mind house rules. What I personally don't like (though some people are perfectly fine with it, so personal preference) is when the game just works the way GM likes it to work at the moment, without a set list of house rules and without consistency (it was not playing favorites in a particular case)
@@sleepinggiant4062 But it makes it more exciting. Having everyone shifting around (or five foot stepping, or whatever you wanna call it) forces the players to react. Keeps things at least somewhat interesting, while still making sense since, you know, harder to fight when two people are on either side.
@@tyrongkojy - right, I understand that, but adding one combatant can only go into the conga line if they want flanking. If they don't, they miss out on it for that round.
@@sleepinggiant4062 And with everyone shifting around (or five foot stepping, or whatever you wanna call it) around, the players have to adapt. It's SOMETHING, and makes sense that, well, if someone is on either side of you things are harder for you.
And we will never see someone not use them. I had an online session, and 4 players needed to enter a mansion, retrieve a prisoner, and escape 2 attackers waiting for them. Pretty simple right? So I decided to do it in theater of mind. Yeah no, never again. Keeping track of who was in range of whom, and where generally in the building was pretty much consuming all my mental capacity I usually have when running combats.
@@deamon6681 Ya'know you could use a map without the grid. Just have a measuring stick to work out ranges and if the minis are at least nearly touching then they're in melee
1. Nat 20 on attack roll does give a ciritcal hit and you roll double dice. Also of note, nat 1s and 20s affect death saves. 2. There's nothing in the rules preventing an unconscious character from gaining the benefits of a health potion if its fed to them. Your rule that they can't is the homebrew rule. 3. Both flanking and rest variants are OFFICIAL optional rules. Just because they're optional doesn't make them any less official.
I think the main thing regarding the spell components is the simple question, "is it fun"? Most DMs try to add options or work around what makes the game more fun for the players, and much like having to keep track of arrows for archers, or the weight of every gold coin in your bag, being told that you can't cast the cool new spell you got just because you haven't had a chance to go shopping kills the fun factor. Also, much like players being unwilling to use potions much because they're "limited", having even more limits on whether you can cast your spells beyond spell slots, means players would be a lot less willing to use them. "Sorry, I know you're being beaten to death by this troll, but it'd cost me 100 gold worth of diamond dust to cast stoneskin on you, and I'd rather save it in case we need it later."
I feel like higher lvl spells like wish and reivifiy need to be limited by components but other than that spells are made too problematic from a balancing stand point without components busted with components not fun there needs to be more widely used over all spell components eg: necromancy has a conpounet of ash it's easy and cheap to get and each spell could cost a cirten amount of grams to cast and by lvl 20 you have no worry as you can make tons of it quickly
That was such a bane in a couple of campaigns I was in (both to level 20). The first one because we couldn't afford much due to low payouts (I shouldn't be saving up money for Revivify at level 15-20 and be unable to afford Raise Dead or Restoration at all). The second one is the Dungeon of the Mad Mage and we haven't seen a town or other place selling stuff since the 3rd floor.
@@robinthrush9672 yeah that seems like the dms fault i dm and play it and give generous amounts of gold per battle and gatekeep them by shop stock eg magic items so they don't run into saving up for spells but i balance it by saying spell casters and archers can only have a set amount ready before restock eg archers 60 arrows can hold more but need to refill quiver before hand
@@MrFranklystickly I agree. The first one was a homebrew campaign, which was fun, but I made the DM very aware of my troubles as a cleric by letting the party know not to be reckless given my ability to afford one cast of Revivify and saving up or pooling coins for Restoration (we were on a mission to save a prior party member who looked a basilisk in the eye and had the statue stolen).
We make it so you either have to get expertise in medicine (or proficiency + a healer kit) or the shape water cantrip to force feed someone uncontious with a healing potion in our tables.
Potions are not water RAW. Shape Water can't manipulate potions. I suppose you let players use Shape Water to manipulate blood, ichor or anything else that is in solution, but isn't water RAW?
@@SodaPopBarbecue that's why i said "in our tables", we homebrewed that if we either create a potion with xanathar's crafting rules, and spend a level 3 spell slot in it's creation (or a combined level of 3, like using 3 level 1 slots for potions we make), it would not only allow the potion to be controlled by any water related spell, but also increase it's effects, it's just a homebrew idea we made, for exemple: an enhanced potion of growth can make the one who drinked it turn back to normal and save the rest of the duration for the next encaunter, drinking the potion costs an action but turning gigantification on and off costs just a bonus action.
@@SodaPopBarbecue If you disallow shape water the ability to move stuff like blood you immediately run into the issue of having to define what separates "water" from "not water". For example, would you allow shape water to move dirty water? What about mud? If yes to dirty water, and no to mud, then you run into the issue of having to define a ppm threshold for something to technically be considered water. Or What about tea? Juice? If I cant shape juice, then can I water the juice down enough to use shape water on it? If yes, then can you just water down a potion to use it with shape water? Does Shape water only work on distilled water? You are inevitably going to run into finicky shenanigans like this, it's easiest to just say it works on any predominantly water based liquid, so you can't shape lava or mercury, but you can shape poison or whatever.
clerics had to be good in REALLY old editions, already by 3.5 you could be a cleric of whatever alignment as long as it was within one "step" of your deity (so a cleric of a neutral good god could be lawful good, neutral good or chaotic good) EDIT: also Warlocks could be good in 3.5, the restriction was "any evil or any chaotic" so you could be a chaotic neutral or chaotic good warlock without issues
3:55 Recently had my DM take my wand away from me and mid fight I had to convince an NPC to hand me his leather tunic to use in the material cost for casting Mage Armour.
I started playing in AD&D 2e then switched over to old world of darkness and just recently started 5e. 2e had the critical fumble rule with a nat 1 that resulted in you losing your weapon or getting it stuck. My dm added to it that things could go bad depending on the situation. We had one player who ran at someone twirling a morningstar above his head. His nat 1 caused him to misjudge the swing, trip because he was running, and tumble down the stairs behind the baddie. It was more for comedic effect but sometimes it did result in self wounds. In old world of darkness it had a critical failure system that specifically said it may result in self-injury or wounding an ally. Especially if using something unwieldy like a chainsaw, you might lose a limb (that was the description in the book). I just started 5e and I use those just because it’s what my players and myself are used to. I didn’t not know about the skill check thing though.
"5e usually tries to avoid a bunch of effects being stacked on top of each other" My 5e Fighter/Cleric/Paladin using the Archery fighting style (+2) with Sharpshooter (-5) on their +2 magic bow, benefiting from Guided Strike (+10), Precision Attack (+1d8) and Sacred Weapon (+CHA), while also having Bless (+1d4), Bardic Inspiration (+1d12) and Emboldening Bond (+1d4) active on them: lol sure
I think the thing with Natural 20s and Ones is just the fact of necessity. Obviously they wont grant massive godlike power or horrible curse, but the fact is is that if a 20 won't succeed the check, why have them make the check in the first place? Same with natural ones, if the check doesn't fail on a nat 1, then there shouldn't be a check made. Exception for checks which check for varying degrees of success, and contesting rolls.
I always assume that they acquire the components for whatever spells they prepare. I always tell them to take out the funds if they don’t specifically state they found said components.
3:33 I might know where this comes from. For the artificer subclass alchemist, you can use an action to feed a experimental elixir, which are like potions but made by you
The only one where alignment actually matters in 5e (and even BG3 did away with it) was Oathbreaker paladin if your DM actually let you play it, which did explicitly say you had to be of Evil alignment (which people tend to ignore anyway, and moreso now with BG3 even including it).
Rolling a 20 should be the equivalent of setting your strength score to +10 temporarily. That means that a strength 10 character has the equivalent of a 30 strength godlike creature. This also checks out realistically as feats of inhuman strength have been achieved through adrenaline removing limiters. All other ability score checks should follow the same logic in order to be fair.
I like the interpretation of the dice rolls on ability checks/attacks are how good/bad your luck was when attempting something. Did you roll a 1 while trying to sneak into a fortress? Well, a guard decided now was a good time to go on a smoke break. Did the heavy armor paladin roll double 20s on a stealth check in the tavern? A barmaid had a heel break while serving drinks, causing a massive commotion, ensuring nobody notice the platemale clad holy knight slip through the celler door.
8:02 I would like to add that the entirety of the outer planes runs on that very philosophical structure to the point that entire realms can move to different dimensions when its inhabitants have the wrong alignment.
3:35 Usually the fantasy is that the character isn’t unconscious yet. They are unable to speak with blurred vision, fighting to stay alive. But they aren’t actually unconscious, which is why they can drink if necessary.
I have a unique ruleset that solves the problem of healing a downed player with a potion AND the getting up after a revive. 1. A player who is downed may not be healed by means such as a Healing Potion, Spells, etc. 2. Players have a new action: The Revive Action, where someone can spend their action to revive another party member (pulling them to their feet as part of it). They DO need to make a medicine check to do so (with the starting HP of the revived character being based on that, any rolls lower than 15 fail)
Honestly, the main reason I don't use flanking is not that the advantage is too powerful, but that it invalidates certain class/race abilities. E.g. why should ANY barbarian ever use reckless attack if they can just move a little? Why would a rogue hide to gain advantage? Why would you choose Kobold for packtactics if everyone gets the same ability? Sure Faerie Fire is a great spell, but... useless if advantage is so easily accessible. And so on.
Just a mini homebrew potion rule: You can either take an action to guzzle a potion, or a bonus action to egg-smash it over your head. The former yields top results (i.e. 1d4+1 Healing would be 5 HP) while the latter is rolled normally
I have very recently started GMing a new campaign, and half the players are new to DnD. For the first session, I gave them a simpler version of the rules to learn, but none of it was homebrew rules. Every new session we play, I introduce a few more rules to help expand the new player's knowledge of the system, and I will also introduce a couple homebrew rules that I like to run at my table, while explaining to them what the rules as written are, and what change I made to those rules, so that they know what the actual rules are, and why I decided to change them. I feel like it helps the players learn the game a little more each time we play. It's the same thing with art; learn the fundamentals first, know what the rules are, and then decide how you want to break them afterwards.
One thing came up on a session today that I found interesting -- underwater spellcasting. RAW, being underwater doesn't affect spells in any way, including those that have verbal or material components. However, you'll probably have trouble convincing the DM that Power Word Kill works perfectly fine underwater.
...It's a word, you have the breath to be underwater, and the rules for breathing are insane. What more do they need other than their feelings are hurt? lol, unless they specifically outlined beforehand how spellcasting in water works that's on the DM.
Wait what? People roll their hp at level 1? It's in the 5e player handbook that every class starts level 1 as if they got their max roll on HP plus their con score. Wizards are already a meme on how low their max HP is. They don't need help with that.
I have never seen a game where healing a downed player got them back on their feet. Even in baulder's gate 3 it takes away your action on your next turn if you were brought back up.
Ok yes, crit 20's may not be official, but I have never seen anyone not use them, but I do feel like people should still have them make a little sense, like with the example you mentioned, there is no way in any of the hells that a scrawny wimp could life a huge boulder.
When I was a noob I never got my idea warped of what the rules were because I just simply assumed that the DM was using homebrew and improvised stuff half the time, which was cool with me.
Alignment is a core concept of the Great Wheel cosmology and Planescape. I can't see myself removing it from any of my 5e games as they will have ramifications in my planescape campaign
You mentioned flanking is optional rule but there's a more extreme example. A lot of DMs use flanking optional rule but a lot don't. I've never met a DM that didn't allow feats and feats are an optional rule! "At certain levels, your class gives you the Ability Score Improvement feature. Using the optional feats rule, you can forgo taking that feature to take a feat of your choice instead. You can take each feat only once, unless the feat's description says otherwise." - PHB165.
A lot of experienced DMs treat Nat1s and Nat20s as automatic failure or success because, and this is mostly (and especially) true at lower levels, the modifiers and roll targets often are not significant enough to make a difference. Most level-appropriate DCs for a party of firsties aren’t 20, and even if they ARE a 20 the PCs usually have some sort of bonuses to the roll; it’s a desperate gamble that relies on the 20. So with players often getting as much as +6 or more, a 20 will always succeed just by numbers. Similarly, it’s INCREDIBLY hard to succeed on a roll of 1. It’s not often that characters of nearly ANY level under, say, 15 have a +15 modifier on rolls.
On Alignment: First, I'm pretty sure Cleric alignment has been "by your deity" choice since AD&D 2E. Pathfinder 2E chose to split the difference with Paladins by changing the class name to Champion and giving each alignment-based Cause a relevant title (LG is Paladin, LE is Tyrant, CG is Liberator, etc.). And now as of Remaster the alignment grid is gone for PCs (It's still functioning on a cosmic scale, but not relevant to mortals), replaced with either personal or religious Edicts and Anathemas as the character's moral guide rails, with some divine types being able to Sanctify as Holy or Unholy to gain those old Good Vs Evil alignment effects.
I like alignment as a purely role play mechanic in my games. Players have an alignment and that alignment (hopefully) gives DM and party a way to predict what kinds of things they will try or want to do.
What I heard as he was talking through that first entry: Tell me you didn't research earlier editions of D&D before making this video, without telling me you didn't research earlier editions of D&D before making this video.
I mean, it's true that critical rolls do not apply in any way to skill checks, but if the official rulebooks say that all a nat 20 does is guarantee a hit, that's something new in 5th Edition. Every prior edition said right in the books, that a nat 20 means you get a guaranteed hit, but you also get to roll a second d20, and if the second roll would land a hit on the target, you get to roll damage twice and add them up for the *actual* damage that you do.
A really easy way to fix flanking is that you must be able to flank without being flanked yourself. If you are busy worrying what's on your back you can't really focus on ganging up on someone else. A good example of rules as written and using your brain.
7:03 the way I think about this is the person who heals you also helps you get back up though this rationale does break down in the face of ranged healing spells
I personally like the alignment restriction* *As a Warlock player who specifically suggested the idea to my DM as a plot device regarding my Celestial patron. Forcing it on other players as a DM without their consent is a no-no.
I prefer alignment too. Without it, a lot of players seem to default to either themselves instead of a character or chaotic neutral impulsive. My only problem has been people thinking Neutral means I won't have the character do "evil" or dishonorable things, like kill an unconscious guard at the evil empire's base.
Clerics didn't need to be good in older editions, clerics of evil gods did exist, the only restriction was that you could only be one alignment away (either horizontally or vertically but not both) from your deity's alignment. So a cleric of a Lawful Good deity could only be Lawful Good, Neutral Good or Lawful Neutral. Also, Barbarians had to be Chaotic at character creation but could deviate from it after.
A star walks into a black hole but doesn't seen phased. The black hole then turns to the star and says, "I don't think you understand the gravity of this situation."
6:41; I do a little adjustment to this homebrew rule, if my player rolls lower than the average, I will then allow them to choose to take the 2, even though most of them actually do choose to take the average.
4:22 I ignore spell components in my games, yes. But I also added a bunch of rules for martial characters, specifically the "stamina" system, where I let martials choose between doing damage to health or another counter, "stamina". Stamina is naturally less plentiful than hit points, and once a martial reduces their enemy's stamina to 0, they either lose their weapon, or if they don't have a weapon, they're knocked prone. I gave each official weapon an SP damage value and a special ability, to make each weapon choice feel unique. My aim was to give each weapon a function, some being better at disarming, others at actually dealing lethal damage, and the special abilities exacerbate each weapon's function. For example, I made so that Daggers are great weapons to get out of grapple locks or deal damage to grappled targets.
as a dm, i do pseudo follow the allignment restriction rule but not to pure segrigation of classes, so basically, unless i rule it to be a part of said character's backstory (like an evil warlock who accidentally summoned a good patron), a warlock with a pact to a good patron will be good aligned in most scenarios unless it would restrict the things i can do with the party / break the continuity of the game
I like the 5×5 alignment grid. I use it as a reference for 'would my character think like this/do this readily?'. But dont use it to restrict players lol. We won't like that
Flanking was a standard rule back in earlier editions, but it got demoted to optional in the oversimplification for 5th edition. The whole dis/advantage system is just a bandaid fix cutting out all the math of stacking adjustments.
Here is a rule that people think is real: Long Rest for leveling up. There is nothing in the PHB that mentions needing a rest to go through a level up. It just makes sense so people go with it. You could technically just level up and go on with your adventure.
I can’t believe how many people ask about flanking… it’s crazy, it was a good rule when a whole move was a 5foot step, not when you can run circles around people. The only way I would let rule work, is to bring back the “5 foot step” rule in tandum, and also need to do something with the mobile feat. Flanking should require some planning not just be nearly always on.
So, on critical fails, you are correct that they just auto miss with no ill effects (some people may be confused from older editions where a Nat 1 DID cause issues), but a Nat 20 in combat DOES change things. Not much, mind you, but it DOES double the dice you roll for damage.
I've never had the idea of administering portions to downed allies come up in an actual D&D game, but I kinda like to think of health potions like the water from the holy grail at the end of Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade.
there's actually official rules for variant resting. Heroic resting is a variant where a short rest takes 5 minutes, and a long rest takes an hour, and then there's Gritty Realism, where a short rest is 8 hours, and a long rest is 7 days of non adventuring.
When it comes to flanking, me and my friends do use it, but we've modified it to simply give a +2 to hit instead of advantage. Overall, we've found it to be a lot more balanced, since it encourages positioning but doesn't make you and your friends into crit farming machines, especially if you have Elven Accuracy, so I recommend trying it out.
The problem with Lawful Good Paladins (and any other class, for that matter) is that people tend to play them as Lawful Stupid - that the character is so hide bound and inflexible that they make very bad decisions "because that is what my character would do". Alignment is meant as a guide, not a straight-jacket. Good doesn't always do good things, Evil doesn't always do evil things, life just isn't that cut and dry. Often the "evil" guy plays the part of the good and righteous leader, keeping his evil side in the shadows. The "good" guy, on the other hand, can do bad things in the name of the greater good. They can even be unsure if any particular action is good or bad, to the point of a tortured consciences.
For me, the one rule I want to know where it came from is "Holding" your action. As opposed to taking the ready action, "Holding" your action replaces your position in Initiative. Letting you take a full turn immediately after another creature's turn, as opposed to using your reaction to make one action. I have no clue where this came from. It's not in Pathfinder, it's not in DND, in any of the editions. I have zero idea where this came from, and it scares me.
Listing flanking because it's an optional rule is like listing feats, which are also an optional rule (PHB 165). It's also weird that you brought up rest variants as "definitely not official" when they're both on DMG page 267.
the deal I notice in some games I play or run when it comes to alignment is that mostly people ether just want to be chaotic neutral and do whatever they want, or want to play evil and play out their anger/frustration/darker urges. Examples are paladins who don't mind killing or doing slaughter(or were on a oath and were not following it at all while not being called oathbreakers), clerics who will let people die, wizards who will do fireball even if it kills a party member, etc. Don't get me wrong it can be fun to play some characters like that, but when like 3 of a 4 man party are like that, and that they do it in every game for years, it can get stale. Whenever a rule on not allowing CN or evil alignment characters get placed in a session 0 (or a restriction to where only one person can play CN or evil), a lot of the players lose interest. Last time this was done they thought backing out would derail and stop the game, until they noticed that there were five other people who wanted to play and were ok with the rule(also found out two of them were also constantly in games to where "everyone played evil all the time").
Personally, I changed flanking to give a +2 to your attack rolls, but you can't flank an enemy while you're being flanked, thus getting rid of the conga-lines.
3:01 I remember our DM tried to fix that by making potions expire in order to avoid us hoarding potions. The only thing it made this far is cause our healing potions to turn into potions of harm (we had them for months, so, I guess it ended up turning into a ). I guess some habits die hard, even if there is a punishment for it 4:54 That one is funny. I was in a campaign where we tried to use flanking as much as possible. There was a combat in which we were extremely unlucky and the enemies also tried to flank us. We missed all the attacks even though we had advantage, and the enemy kept critting and we almost die to a random encounter that the DM wasn't even expecting that we would have trouble with. After that, when the enemies benefit from the flanking rules, we jokingly say we are going aboard the flanking train. Didn't know it was so common as to have a term. Also, the conga line also feels appropiate.
Flanking is a rule that makes sense from a realist perspective but so is bullets taking someone down in one hit and fps games routinely break that element of realism for the sake of fun so I guess it depends on how realistic you want you combat in D&D to be.
me and my friends run an alt version of flanking for advantage. instead of adv we get a +2 to the rate we hit them, and if they are surrounded it increases by +5. it's pretty handy honestly.
Personally I quite enjoyed class restrictions by alignment and whenever I play a class in 5e, I adhere to the 3e and Pathfinder restrictions. That being said, I don't try to make others play my way as that would be pretty disrespectful to them and probably ruin their enjoyment. Also as a minor correction: Cleric wasn't ever restricted to being Good aligned. It was restricted to Non-Neutral in 1e as well as AD&D and then got changed to being within one step of their deity's alignment in 3e.
Regarding spell components, I do actually use them, but instead than having costly and non-costly, with the formers being defined just by having some form of pricing, I have rarities. Only the "very common" ones are available in unlimited quantities, if you have a spell pouch. All the rest must be bought, accounted for, and carried around, with availability being tied to rarity. A rare spell component can only be found in a big city, and a single ultra-rare one requires either a very long downtime research or a dedicated expedition to be found. The rarer, the pricer, too. Every single spell in my games requires components, even cantrips, although these only require very common ones. That doesn't mean casters do not have troubles. Spell pouches can be stolen, destroyed and such, and the same goes for focus items. In my opinion, spell components are much like "ammo for magic" while focuses are much like "weapons for magic". And they have to be equipped as such too. About administering a potion, the problem is not much what action is required for it, but all the other actions you need to perform to be actually able to administer it. These are things like actually drawing out the required potion, passing it to the character which is going to administer it if different, reaching the character in need, and so on. In the worst cases, it could take several rounds to pull out that stunt. I've noticed that almost no one remembers that all that is necessary too.
My DM has a homebrew rule for NAT 1's if you are making a ranged attack and there is a party member near where you are aiming they need to roll a DEX to avoid friendly fire. On the other hand if you are making a melee attack and roll a NAT 1 you need to make a DEX save or lose a grip on your weapon.
Nat 20s in 5e double the rolled dice in the books PHB pg. 196 "When you score a critical hit, you get to roll extra dice for the attack's damage against the target.-" And PHB pg. 194 "If the d20 roll for an attack is a 20, the attack hits regardless of any modifiers or the target's AC. This is called a critical hit-" So no, rolling a Nat 20 doesn't just hit the target, it's a critical hit, and you're told to roll extra dice for it. This is specific to attack rolls however, things that ask you for an attack roll are subject to critical hit rules, which explicitly includes dice added on because of the critical hit, such as sneak attack and smite also being doubled
Crits on abilities are not a homebrew but are stated as an optional rule in DMG p.242. One of my players would swear up and down that abilities can't crit due to their fear of failing but we're always fist in line to try and declare flanking... Which I didnt use... Ever.
I mean, there's a built-in method of ignoring spell components. It doesn't work on consumed components and components with GP costs, but ignoring components is in the official rules.
Almost touched on it with that first one, but the most common mistake that I see everywhere is the idea that rolling a 1 always fails, or rolling a 20 always succeeds. That's not a thing. It's a rule for attacks in combat, and for death saves, but not for any other roll. Doesn't help that BG3 uses that house rule.
We're Live on Twitch! www.twitch.tv/blaine_simple
*Updates!*
* You can actually force feed healing potions to downed character. You still can't throw them to heal people, though.
* Critical hits also affect death saves by bringing up back to 1 hp, and also double the damage dice for attacks. I was mostly referring to how critical ability checks aren't official, but glanced over the extra effect on damage rolls.
* Clerics were only locked into being one alignment tick off from their god in older editions!
* Rest variants are actually another obscure rule from the DMG! It's essentially forgotten about though, and more often homebrewed than utilized, but it's there!
@BlaineSimple hey blaine, is Silver a girl or a femboy? WE NEED TO KNOW!
the crit roll house rule is dumb and i've always said it every table i've been at that runs it (even when i benefit)
Hello @BlaineSimple! Who is the artist of the girl in your Thumbnail? It's very good!
Rest Variants is not a homebrew rule, it's an alternative option found in the DMG
Most people aren't ignoring components, every caster class starts with either a focus or a component pouch suitable for their class. Except rangers, who seemingly don't have a focus for their class unless you use the optional rule that lets them use a druidic focus.
"Casting some spells requires particular objects, specified in parentheses in the component entry. A character can use a component pouch or a spellcasting focus (found in chapter 5) in place of the components specified for a spell. But if a cost is indicated for a component, a character must have that specific component before he or she can cast the spell." -phb chapter 10, 'components'
the dmg and phb does specify you can adminster a potion to a creature with as action, and it doesn't specify the creature needs to be conscious. sure you cannot throw them on them to simply get them back up, but you can adminster them when your allies are down.
This. At my tables, you can drink a healing potion as a bonus action, but administering one takes a standard action.
@@samuelsouth.We do that with a bonus action you roll and with an action you get the max amount of healing from the potion.
Exactly. Potions, as a general rule, are _literally liquid magic._ Why "should" they be restricted to such mundane biological concepts as "digestion"? You just have to unambiguously get the potion fluid "inside the body" of the person you're trying to use it on (huh, homebrew potential for a combat medic with a syringe crossbow inflicting injected potion effects?)...
@@WackoMcGoose I like that last idea, like of of part of the attacks you can try to administer a potion
@@WackoMcGoose Good point. "Bran's been gored by a minotaur! How do we heal him?" Just pour the potion into his wound, duh!
3:50 The components aren't random; they're references to how certain effects are made in reality, idioms, or magic tricks. Fireball requires bat poop and sulfur, common ingredients in simple explosives. Detect Thoughts uses a copper piece to play on "A penny for your thoughts." Lightning Bolt uses fur and amber to generate static electricity. And so on.
... i had no idea, thats so funny, a wizard goin "Imma zap ya!" *shuffles feet around on the carpet*
The fact that darkvision’s material component is carrots is one of my personal favorites
Minor illusion is a piece of fleece; pulling the wool over their eyes. Sleep needs sand, rose petals, or a cricket.
@@polarknight5376 Mr. Sandman, a bed of roses (best I can figure for rose petals), and the sounds of the evening, I think. Yeah?
@@robinthrush9672 yep
To correct you on clerics, they had to be within one-step away from their deity's alignment, not that they had to be good. A better example would be 3.5 having bards/barbarians needing to be anything but lawful and druids having to be neutral somewhere on their alignment. Oddly enough, rogues had no such restrictions.
Bards didn't need to be chaotic, they just couldn't be lawful. That's a *huge* difference cause alignment used to actually matter.
pretty sure Rogues or Thiefs could be any alignment except lawful.
Pathfinder's Gray Paladins where nice for this reason.
Had to be a good god, but you could be Neutral or Chaotic.
Or even Lawful Neutral, with the right God.
@@casteanpreswyn7528 Seems like I misremembered. Thanks.
@@Malkuth-Gaming in 3.5 there is no alignment restriction for rogues, and I didn't see anything looking in the 2e Advance PHB.
In regards to reviving a downed party member with a potion. It is, in fact, possible to force feed liquids to an unconscious person, so pouring a healing potion down the throat of an unconscious party member would work (in my experience, apart from BG3, giving a downed party member a healing potion requires being in an adjacent space). Also, the rules state that a potion can be administered to another creature and does not specify that the creature must not be unconscious.
And that's not counting the fact that in DnD, potions are magical in nature. So they wouldn't need to go through your whole digestive tract to be effective
@@ofnir123 ^ This.
Also iirc the description of a Potion of Healing states that drinking or *administering* a potion takes an Action.
Administering doesn't necassairy mean feeding. It can also mean just pouring the damn thing over someone. XD
On the first one about nat 1 & 20, "They just guarantee that some of your attack hit or miss"
The rules do still state that you roll double the amount of damage dice. The way you said it makes it sound like a nat 20 on an attack gets no bonuses other than guaranteeing the hit.
PHB chapter 9, Making an attack, Attack rolls:
Rolling 1 or 20
Sometimes fate blesses or curses a combatant, causing the novice to hit and the veteran to miss.
If the d20 roll for an attack is a 20, the attack hits regardless of any modifiers or the target’s AC. This is called a critical hit, which is explained later in this chapter.
If the d20 roll for an attack is a 1, the attack misses regardless of any modifiers or the target’s AC.
Later in the same chapter under damage and healing:
Critical Hits
When you score a critical hit, you get to roll extra dice for the attack’s damage against the target. Roll all of the attack’s damage dice twice and add them together. Then add any relevant modifiers as normal. To speed up play, you can roll all the damage dice at once.
They also have additional affect when it comes to death saving throws.
Also, the vid just says "D&D", but it should be mentioned, this is only true for *5E* D&D. Critical hits and critical misses used to be more impactful in prior editions, mainly 3e and 3.5.
@@Niko__01 Good point. Though I feel like when the majority of people hear "D&D", their first thought would be 5E first, then think of other editions afterwards.
@@almondsai7214 I mean, they mention prior editions later in the video for alignments and class restrictions, so...
@@Niko__01 Yeah, but he was just talking about how it used to be an old rule that doesn't apply anymore.
Components suck because not every one has a lock of lesbian hair or a unicorn toe just to cast a spell
And you don’t need it, _so long as it’s not consumed_
The number of spells that actually do that below 5th level is like 4, and all of those are for balance concerns, eg Glyph of Warding.
I will next time I see your mom
You say that, but a lot of components are jokes, like detect thoughts, most illusion spells, message, darkvision, the list goes on
Yeah, I can see requiring you to get components for consumables, but "you can't use that spell until you can find a place selling crystal balls"? Yeah, I'll just have them spend the gold when they get the spell and be done with it, thanks.
@@maddie9602 cause the poor reality warpers need the help. Lol
Also on the topic of Spellcasting Material Components, some forget the "which the spell consumes" note here and there. I remember thinking, if it had a gold cost, you expend the item regardless. Then I read the Sage Advice Compendium, and found out it has to say that an item is consumed in order to be consumed. Otherwise, you keep it and can use the costly component again and again.
In 5e... Spell Focus Item = Component Pouch... So unless it's money, consumed item, or artifacts. Then both of these items can forgo the Material stuff.
Spell Focus ignores Material Costs and Component Pouch contains all Materials.
Plus... You don't need a Free Hand to use both items because the Specific Rule gives you a Free Hand. Just remember that Semantics and Hand Gestures are not negated normally. This isn't like Dark Souls 1 where you had to hold a Staff separately from your other weapon or shield.
And Paladins can put their Spell Focus on Shields. Turning their Shield into their Spell Focus.
Rest variants are actually a game option in the Dungeon Master's Guide. There are actually several optional rules in chapter 9 of the DMG, all of which read like some kind of homebrew rules. It's actually pretty wild; proficiency dice, plot points, and even additional abilities, honor and sanity. All things I've heard of, but thought were some homebrew rules that get passed around Reddit, I didn't think these were not only official rules options, but from CORE.
Yeah, I recently was told about the cleaving additional rule, and it's so good for martials.
@@almondsai7214 I shared that with my party last night and the fighter got really excited. Good thing too, as we are currently fighting a horde of zombies.
THANK YOU
2 mistakes on the critical rolls bit : firstly: they apply to death saving throws as well as attacks with nat 1 meaning 2 death saves and nat 20 meaning you heal 1 hp. Secondly: rolling nat 20 on an attack roll does more than just auto-hit, it also doubles the damage dice.
Yeah, I was coming down to see if anyone pointed out that critical hits ARE a thing for attacks. They just don’t do anything for skills.
not to be a grammar nazi, but it should be noted, you are set to 1 hp on a nat 20 death save, you don't heal any. in cases like chill touch that prevent healing, you'd still get up at 1 hp because of the wording
@@SamLabbato You're wrong. Chapter 9: Combat - Healing details that healing is hit points "regained". Cure Wounds spell details target "regains" hit point. So, regain hit points = healing. And would ya look at that, right there in Death Saving Throws: "If you roll a 20 on the d20, you regain 1 hit point." EVEN IF you don't wanna subscribe to "regain" meaning healing, the actual wordage of Chill Touch is "it can't regain hit points" which matches that DST nat 20 "regains 1 hit point" - so either way, Chill Touch does, in fact, prevent nat 20 effect on DST.
Whenever I change a rule I make it clear to my players as soon as I can that that's what we're going to be doing in the game, bans included.
Pentagon d20 is my worst nightmare
1:30 Worse, hexagon d20.
At least pentagon would be flatening all faces around a point.
@@aidanpalmer1075 Even worse, spherical d20.
@@almondsai7214 Funny enough, the dUltimate kickstarter from a few years ago is conceptually pretty close to a spherical d20 (as well as the other types of dice)... oh, and the Orbidice _literally are_ spherical d20s (and other kinds, but not all on the same die).
7:11 bg3 remade rule with getting up. revived characters loose ACTION for 1 turn, witch is much worser then just speed. most of classes cant do anything with bonus action only, and its good option against players who abuse thing with "fall, restore 1 hp, make attack , fall, again" (i forgot the name of it.)
Evil Clerics existed in First Edition. Evil Clerics even had variant Cleric Spells and different magic items geared towards them.
I was thinking about that, a better example would be rangers having to be of good alignment.
Spell material components are fun. People are just scared of them because they assume it makes spellcasting a lot more complex, which it doesn't. The majority of spells don't consume the material so you just have to acquire the component one time and you're set from then on. Which means a small side trip to the arcane shop or searching around an area where you could reasonably find the material you need in the wilderness and that can lead to some fun roleplay. Not much difference from needing to be acquire weapons at a blacksmith when you think about it, weapons are like a material component to do melee attacks really.
Facts. To expand a little bit the spells description usually specifically includes the phrase “component is consumed” for applicable spells meaning as long as you have a spell component pouch you are good to go.
I have rarely seen DMs give a (deliberate) pass to casters not having the expensive components on hand. I've seen a DM who didn't know better allow a caster without the component to cast the spell, but when he went and looked it up, he put a stop to that. Getting the material component can sometimes be a mini-quest or a downtime activity all its own!
Depends... RAW wise... As only consumed items, money, and artifacts cannot be accessed by any Spell Focus nor Component Pouch.
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 And anything that has a gp value. So you can't use an arcane focus to replace the 100 gp pearl required for _identify,_ for example. You need to get the pearl. Once you have it, you can cast _identify_ any time you have the spell slot, though. Or as a ritual.
@@segevstormlord3713
True... Also, Spell Scrolls can cast spells for free. Provided, that either an NPC or PC makes one. You already spent the materials, money, and time to craft a Spell Scroll.
But no one will use a Spell Scroll.
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 Sure they will, as long as the spell is already in the wizard's spellbook. If not, it'll be used to put it there.
But I've seen people use scrolls. Scrolls, for some reason, don't get saved quite the way potions do.
@@segevstormlord3713Probably just the way people think of them as resources. Scrolls, if not used for spell book copying, are seen as prepared spell slots beyond the normal pool. Potions are seen more as a lifeline or an ace in the hole. Plan C versus plan Z.
Critical nat 20 get double damage.
Critical Hits
When you score a critical hit, you get to roll extra dice for the attack’s damage against the target. Roll all of the attack’s damage dice twice and add them together. Then add any relevant modifiers as normal. To speed up play, you can roll all the damage dice at once.
For example, if you score a critical hit with a dagger, roll 2d4 for the damage, rather than 1d4, and then add your relevant ability modifier. If the attack involves other damage dice, such as from the rogue’s Sneak Attack feature, you roll those dice twice as well.
Yeah, I was gunna say this too. lol
That's as home rule not a book rule I'm 99% surw
I honestly am very glad that many DMs ignore the rule of "1 disadvantage cancels out all advantage and vice versa". Cause if your opponent is blinded, bound, and you sneak up on him for your ranged attack, it would je really stupid that you lose your advantage just because they are prone.
I never understood why people don't like spell components, especially for wizards. I had a 3e wizard ages ago, and I'd make sure to go out of my way to find the components for any new spells I learned then describe how he used it in casting the spell. I think my favorite was ice storm because we were in a frozen tundra some distance from a volcano, so he took some of the snow on the ground, melted it with his hands, then threw it, making it refreeze into shards before appearing over the enemies we were fighting and crashing down. Having to explain to one of the locals why I need bat shit was funny enough to also make it worth it honestly.
A simple amendment to flanking: a creature that is being flanked cannot gain advantage when flanking another. It logically makes perfect sense. You can still have a huge chain of flanking but if you leap at the end of the chain it makes it so that only those on the edges gain flanking advantage. It also adds combat depth to some extent. If a party member is being flanked, you can choose to hop on either end of the chain - this will let you flank one specific enemy but also mean the other one still gets advantage, or you could if possible position your character adjacent to both flankers and turn it into a 2-v-2 flank where nobody has advantage.
Long rest for a week is an official optional rule, and I'm not convinced about potions
Also, undisclosed house rules are the worst. "You roll a nat 1, so you hit your ally... And this time you roll nat 1, but nothing happens, because it isn't dramatic." It was far from the worst game I had, but all that "I don't do rules, I do rulings, ask about everything" was just annoying
Yeah, rules are really important for ttrpgs. And he was wrong about potions, as well. You can't throw them, but you can feed them to downed creatures.
It's good to add special rules per table, it's not good to not talk about it previously so that everyone can come to an agreement
@@RositaDepre I don't mind house rules. What I personally don't like (though some people are perfectly fine with it, so personal preference) is when the game just works the way GM likes it to work at the moment, without a set list of house rules and without consistency (it was not playing favorites in a particular case)
@@nabra97 I completely agree with you
Flanking also works diagonally, at least in 4e. It's less a conga line, if you're actually trying to make things interesting.
When adding one combatant to get flanking, you still need to make a line to get flanking, even diagonally.
@@sleepinggiant4062 But it makes it more exciting. Having everyone shifting around (or five foot stepping, or whatever you wanna call it) forces the players to react. Keeps things at least somewhat interesting, while still making sense since, you know, harder to fight when two people are on either side.
@@tyrongkojy - right, I understand that, but adding one combatant can only go into the conga line if they want flanking. If they don't, they miss out on it for that round.
@@sleepinggiant4062 And with everyone shifting around (or five foot stepping, or whatever you wanna call it) around, the players have to adapt. It's SOMETHING, and makes sense that, well, if someone is on either side of you things are harder for you.
Fun fact, Gridded combat maps are technicallt a variant rule
And we will never see someone not use them.
I had an online session, and 4 players needed to enter a mansion, retrieve a prisoner, and escape 2 attackers waiting for them. Pretty simple right? So I decided to do it in theater of mind. Yeah no, never again. Keeping track of who was in range of whom, and where generally in the building was pretty much consuming all my mental capacity I usually have when running combats.
@@deamon6681 Ya'know you could use a map without the grid. Just have a measuring stick to work out ranges and if the minis are at least nearly touching then they're in melee
@@LordZeebee
I have a map, my comment was about thinking not using it is ok for a small encounter, and how wrong that idea turned out to be.
1. Nat 20 on attack roll does give a ciritcal hit and you roll double dice. Also of note, nat 1s and 20s affect death saves.
2. There's nothing in the rules preventing an unconscious character from gaining the benefits of a health potion if its fed to them. Your rule that they can't is the homebrew rule.
3. Both flanking and rest variants are OFFICIAL optional rules. Just because they're optional doesn't make them any less official.
I think the main thing regarding the spell components is the simple question, "is it fun"? Most DMs try to add options or work around what makes the game more fun for the players, and much like having to keep track of arrows for archers, or the weight of every gold coin in your bag, being told that you can't cast the cool new spell you got just because you haven't had a chance to go shopping kills the fun factor.
Also, much like players being unwilling to use potions much because they're "limited", having even more limits on whether you can cast your spells beyond spell slots, means players would be a lot less willing to use them.
"Sorry, I know you're being beaten to death by this troll, but it'd cost me 100 gold worth of diamond dust to cast stoneskin on you, and I'd rather save it in case we need it later."
I feel like higher lvl spells like wish and reivifiy need to be limited by components but other than that spells are made too problematic from a balancing stand point without components busted with components not fun there needs to be more widely used over all spell components eg: necromancy has a conpounet of ash it's easy and cheap to get and each spell could cost a cirten amount of grams to cast and by lvl 20 you have no worry as you can make tons of it quickly
Also the arrow tracking is good as it keeps players imersted and weary also it gives artificers a use
That was such a bane in a couple of campaigns I was in (both to level 20). The first one because we couldn't afford much due to low payouts (I shouldn't be saving up money for Revivify at level 15-20 and be unable to afford Raise Dead or Restoration at all). The second one is the Dungeon of the Mad Mage and we haven't seen a town or other place selling stuff since the 3rd floor.
@@robinthrush9672 yeah that seems like the dms fault i dm and play it and give generous amounts of gold per battle and gatekeep them by shop stock eg magic items so they don't run into saving up for spells but i balance it by saying spell casters and archers can only have a set amount ready before restock eg archers 60 arrows can hold more but need to refill quiver before hand
@@MrFranklystickly I agree. The first one was a homebrew campaign, which was fun, but I made the DM very aware of my troubles as a cleric by letting the party know not to be reckless given my ability to afford one cast of Revivify and saving up or pooling coins for Restoration (we were on a mission to save a prior party member who looked a basilisk in the eye and had the statue stolen).
the thing on nat 20s wasn't entirely correct. Getting a crit on an attack roll also grants you additional damage (roll double the dice).
It also has additional affects while you're making death saving throws.
Actually, a nat20 doesn't just "guarantee a hit", it also increases damage. So it does make you stronger.
We make it so you either have to get expertise in medicine (or proficiency + a healer kit) or the shape water cantrip to force feed someone uncontious with a healing potion in our tables.
Potions are not water RAW.
Shape Water can't manipulate potions.
I suppose you let players use Shape Water to manipulate blood, ichor or anything else that is in solution, but isn't water RAW?
@@SodaPopBarbecue that's why i said "in our tables", we homebrewed that if we either create a potion with xanathar's crafting rules, and spend a level 3 spell slot in it's creation (or a combined level of 3, like using 3 level 1 slots for potions we make), it would not only allow the potion to be controlled by any water related spell, but also increase it's effects, it's just a homebrew idea we made, for exemple: an enhanced potion of growth can make the one who drinked it turn back to normal and save the rest of the duration for the next encaunter, drinking the potion costs an action but turning gigantification on and off costs just a bonus action.
@@SodaPopBarbecue If you disallow shape water the ability to move stuff like blood you immediately run into the issue of having to define what separates "water" from "not water".
For example, would you allow shape water to move dirty water? What about mud? If yes to dirty water, and no to mud, then you run into the issue of having to define a ppm threshold for something to technically be considered water.
Or What about tea? Juice? If I cant shape juice, then can I water the juice down enough to use shape water on it? If yes, then can you just water down a potion to use it with shape water? Does Shape water only work on distilled water?
You are inevitably going to run into finicky shenanigans like this, it's easiest to just say it works on any predominantly water based liquid, so you can't shape lava or mercury, but you can shape poison or whatever.
rules as written you can force feed healing potions but you can't throw them and expect them to work
clerics had to be good in REALLY old editions, already by 3.5 you could be a cleric of whatever alignment as long as it was within one "step" of your deity (so a cleric of a neutral good god could be lawful good, neutral good or chaotic good)
EDIT: also Warlocks could be good in 3.5, the restriction was "any evil or any chaotic" so you could be a chaotic neutral or chaotic good warlock without issues
3:55 Recently had my DM take my wand away from me and mid fight I had to convince an NPC to hand me his leather tunic to use in the material cost for casting Mage Armour.
I started playing in AD&D 2e then switched over to old world of darkness and just recently started 5e. 2e had the critical fumble rule with a nat 1 that resulted in you losing your weapon or getting it stuck. My dm added to it that things could go bad depending on the situation. We had one player who ran at someone twirling a morningstar above his head. His nat 1 caused him to misjudge the swing, trip because he was running, and tumble down the stairs behind the baddie. It was more for comedic effect but sometimes it did result in self wounds.
In old world of darkness it had a critical failure system that specifically said it may result in self-injury or wounding an ally. Especially if using something unwieldy like a chainsaw, you might lose a limb (that was the description in the book).
I just started 5e and I use those just because it’s what my players and myself are used to. I didn’t not know about the skill check thing though.
"5e usually tries to avoid a bunch of effects being stacked on top of each other"
My 5e Fighter/Cleric/Paladin using the Archery fighting style (+2) with Sharpshooter (-5) on their +2 magic bow, benefiting from Guided Strike (+10), Precision Attack (+1d8) and Sacred Weapon (+CHA), while also having Bless (+1d4), Bardic Inspiration (+1d12) and Emboldening Bond (+1d4) active on them: lol sure
I gave potion tossing to heal as a feat in 3.5. Called it potion pitcher like ff tactics. The prerequite was potion making.
2:21 this is how our halfling wizard pushed a boulder
Rule people think is offical
Landing on "Free Parking" means you can take all the money in the bank
I n t h e b a n k ? !
The whole bank? Damn, when can I land on free parking?
I think the thing with Natural 20s and Ones is just the fact of necessity. Obviously they wont grant massive godlike power or horrible curse, but the fact is is that if a 20 won't succeed the check, why have them make the check in the first place? Same with natural ones, if the check doesn't fail on a nat 1, then there shouldn't be a check made. Exception for checks which check for varying degrees of success, and contesting rolls.
I always assume that they acquire the components for whatever spells they prepare. I always tell them to take out the funds if they don’t specifically state they found said components.
3:33 I might know where this comes from. For the artificer subclass alchemist, you can use an action to feed a experimental elixir, which are like potions but made by you
The only one where alignment actually matters in 5e (and even BG3 did away with it) was Oathbreaker paladin if your DM actually let you play it, which did explicitly say you had to be of Evil alignment (which people tend to ignore anyway, and moreso now with BG3 even including it).
Imagine, for 6:40 , you have a character with -2 con and roll a 2 on hp. Your character was born stillborn, reroll nerd.
No, they'd have 1 HP, because 1 HP is the minimum. Unless your GM is less into old-school D&D and more into old-school Traveller.
@@Viehzerrer fair enough, but if a DM sees a player effectively get 0 max hp, they should promptly offer a reroll regardless.
Rolling a 20 should be the equivalent of setting your strength score to +10 temporarily. That means that a strength 10 character has the equivalent of a 30 strength godlike creature.
This also checks out realistically as feats of inhuman strength have been achieved through adrenaline removing limiters.
All other ability score checks should follow the same logic in order to be fair.
I like the interpretation of the dice rolls on ability checks/attacks are how good/bad your luck was when attempting something. Did you roll a 1 while trying to sneak into a fortress? Well, a guard decided now was a good time to go on a smoke break. Did the heavy armor paladin roll double 20s on a stealth check in the tavern? A barmaid had a heel break while serving drinks, causing a massive commotion, ensuring nobody notice the platemale clad holy knight slip through the celler door.
How exactly would the guard being on smoke break make it harder to sneak i to the fortress?
@@patrickholzer6415alternate unplanned route, bumping into the party, I'd assume?
@@patrickholzer6415 he went out the back door the second you were going through
8:02 I would like to add that the entirety of the outer planes runs on that very philosophical structure to the point that entire realms can move to different dimensions when its inhabitants have the wrong alignment.
3:35 Usually the fantasy is that the character isn’t unconscious yet. They are unable to speak with blurred vision, fighting to stay alive. But they aren’t actually unconscious, which is why they can drink if necessary.
Fun Fact: Bat guano was used in explosives in the real world, so making it an ingredient for Fire Ball actually makes some sense. lol🔥
I have a unique ruleset that solves the problem of healing a downed player with a potion AND the getting up after a revive.
1. A player who is downed may not be healed by means such as a Healing Potion, Spells, etc.
2. Players have a new action: The Revive Action, where someone can spend their action to revive another party member (pulling them to their feet as part of it). They DO need to make a medicine check to do so (with the starting HP of the revived character being based on that, any rolls lower than 15 fail)
Honestly, the main reason I don't use flanking is not that the advantage is too powerful, but that it invalidates certain class/race abilities. E.g. why should ANY barbarian ever use reckless attack if they can just move a little? Why would a rogue hide to gain advantage? Why would you choose Kobold for packtactics if everyone gets the same ability? Sure Faerie Fire is a great spell, but... useless if advantage is so easily accessible. And so on.
Just a mini homebrew potion rule: You can either take an action to guzzle a potion, or a bonus action to egg-smash it over your head. The former yields top results (i.e. 1d4+1 Healing would be 5 HP) while the latter is rolled normally
I have very recently started GMing a new campaign, and half the players are new to DnD. For the first session, I gave them a simpler version of the rules to learn, but none of it was homebrew rules. Every new session we play, I introduce a few more rules to help expand the new player's knowledge of the system, and I will also introduce a couple homebrew rules that I like to run at my table, while explaining to them what the rules as written are, and what change I made to those rules, so that they know what the actual rules are, and why I decided to change them. I feel like it helps the players learn the game a little more each time we play.
It's the same thing with art; learn the fundamentals first, know what the rules are, and then decide how you want to break them afterwards.
One thing came up on a session today that I found interesting -- underwater spellcasting. RAW, being underwater doesn't affect spells in any way, including those that have verbal or material components. However, you'll probably have trouble convincing the DM that Power Word Kill works perfectly fine underwater.
...It's a word, you have the breath to be underwater, and the rules for breathing are insane. What more do they need other than their feelings are hurt? lol, unless they specifically outlined beforehand how spellcasting in water works that's on the DM.
Wait what? People roll their hp at level 1? It's in the 5e player handbook that every class starts level 1 as if they got their max roll on HP plus their con score. Wizards are already a meme on how low their max HP is. They don't need help with that.
Natural 20s on attack rolls also do double your damage dice, on top of automatically hitting.
I have never seen a game where healing a downed player got them back on their feet. Even in baulder's gate 3 it takes away your action on your next turn if you were brought back up.
Ok yes, crit 20's may not be official, but I have never seen anyone not use them, but I do feel like people should still have them make a little sense, like with the example you mentioned, there is no way in any of the hells that a scrawny wimp could life a huge boulder.
When I was a noob I never got my idea warped of what the rules were because I just simply assumed that the DM was using homebrew and improvised stuff half the time, which was cool with me.
Alignment is a core concept of the Great Wheel cosmology and Planescape.
I can't see myself removing it from any of my 5e games as they will have ramifications in my planescape campaign
You mentioned flanking is optional rule but there's a more extreme example. A lot of DMs use flanking optional rule but a lot don't. I've never met a DM that didn't allow feats and feats are an optional rule!
"At certain levels, your class gives you the Ability Score Improvement feature. Using the optional feats rule, you can forgo taking that feature to take a feat of your choice instead. You can take each feat only once, unless the feat's description says otherwise." - PHB165.
A lot of experienced DMs treat Nat1s and Nat20s as automatic failure or success because, and this is mostly (and especially) true at lower levels, the modifiers and roll targets often are not significant enough to make a difference. Most level-appropriate DCs for a party of firsties aren’t 20, and even if they ARE a 20 the PCs usually have some sort of bonuses to the roll; it’s a desperate gamble that relies on the 20. So with players often getting as much as +6 or more, a 20 will always succeed just by numbers. Similarly, it’s INCREDIBLY hard to succeed on a roll of 1. It’s not often that characters of nearly ANY level under, say, 15 have a +15 modifier on rolls.
On Alignment:
First, I'm pretty sure Cleric alignment has been "by your deity" choice since AD&D 2E.
Pathfinder 2E chose to split the difference with Paladins by changing the class name to Champion and giving each alignment-based Cause a relevant title (LG is Paladin, LE is Tyrant, CG is Liberator, etc.). And now as of Remaster the alignment grid is gone for PCs (It's still functioning on a cosmic scale, but not relevant to mortals), replaced with either personal or religious Edicts and Anathemas as the character's moral guide rails, with some divine types being able to Sanctify as Holy or Unholy to gain those old Good Vs Evil alignment effects.
I like flanking for +2 because advantage is really powerful
I like alignment as a purely role play mechanic in my games. Players have an alignment and that alignment (hopefully) gives DM and party a way to predict what kinds of things they will try or want to do.
What I heard as he was talking through that first entry: Tell me you didn't research earlier editions of D&D before making this video, without telling me you didn't research earlier editions of D&D before making this video.
I mean, it's true that critical rolls do not apply in any way to skill checks, but if the official rulebooks say that all a nat 20 does is guarantee a hit, that's something new in 5th Edition. Every prior edition said right in the books, that a nat 20 means you get a guaranteed hit, but you also get to roll a second d20, and if the second roll would land a hit on the target, you get to roll damage twice and add them up for the *actual* damage that you do.
A really easy way to fix flanking is that you must be able to flank without being flanked yourself. If you are busy worrying what's on your back you can't really focus on ganging up on someone else. A good example of rules as written and using your brain.
7:03 the way I think about this is the person who heals you also helps you get back up though this rationale does break down in the face of ranged healing spells
You can administer a potion of healing to another character as an action, therefore reviving someone with a potion is, in fact, within the rules
I personally like the alignment restriction*
*As a Warlock player who specifically suggested the idea to my DM as a plot device regarding my Celestial patron. Forcing it on other players as a DM without their consent is a no-no.
Bro this kinda thing is mentioned at the start. If the player doesn't wanna deal with it they can just fuck off.
I prefer alignment too. Without it, a lot of players seem to default to either themselves instead of a character or chaotic neutral impulsive. My only problem has been people thinking Neutral means I won't have the character do "evil" or dishonorable things, like kill an unconscious guard at the evil empire's base.
Clerics didn't need to be good in older editions, clerics of evil gods did exist, the only restriction was that you could only be one alignment away (either horizontally or vertically but not both) from your deity's alignment. So a cleric of a Lawful Good deity could only be Lawful Good, Neutral Good or Lawful Neutral. Also, Barbarians had to be Chaotic at character creation but could deviate from it after.
A star walks into a black hole but doesn't seen phased. The black hole then turns to the star and says, "I don't think you understand the gravity of this situation."
6:41; I do a little adjustment to this homebrew rule, if my player rolls lower than the average, I will then allow them to choose to take the 2, even though most of them actually do choose to take the average.
4:22
I ignore spell components in my games, yes. But I also added a bunch of rules for martial characters, specifically the "stamina" system, where I let martials choose between doing damage to health or another counter, "stamina". Stamina is naturally less plentiful than hit points, and once a martial reduces their enemy's stamina to 0, they either lose their weapon, or if they don't have a weapon, they're knocked prone. I gave each official weapon an SP damage value and a special ability, to make each weapon choice feel unique. My aim was to give each weapon a function, some being better at disarming, others at actually dealing lethal damage, and the special abilities exacerbate each weapon's function. For example, I made so that Daggers are great weapons to get out of grapple locks or deal damage to grappled targets.
as a dm, i do pseudo follow the allignment restriction rule but not to pure segrigation of classes, so basically, unless i rule it to be a part of said character's backstory (like an evil warlock who accidentally summoned a good patron), a warlock with a pact to a good patron will be good aligned in most scenarios unless it would restrict the things i can do with the party / break the continuity of the game
I like the 5×5 alignment grid. I use it as a reference for 'would my character think like this/do this readily?'. But dont use it to restrict players lol. We won't like that
Flanking was a standard rule back in earlier editions, but it got demoted to optional in the oversimplification for 5th edition. The whole dis/advantage system is just a bandaid fix cutting out all the math of stacking adjustments.
Here is a rule that people think is real: Long Rest for leveling up. There is nothing in the PHB that mentions needing a rest to go through a level up. It just makes sense so people go with it.
You could technically just level up and go on with your adventure.
I can’t believe how many people ask about flanking… it’s crazy, it was a good rule when a whole move was a 5foot step, not when you can run circles around people. The only way I would let rule work, is to bring back the “5 foot step” rule in tandum, and also need to do something with the mobile feat. Flanking should require some planning not just be nearly always on.
So, on critical fails, you are correct that they just auto miss with no ill effects (some people may be confused from older editions where a Nat 1 DID cause issues), but a Nat 20 in combat DOES change things. Not much, mind you, but it DOES double the dice you roll for damage.
I've never had the idea of administering portions to downed allies come up in an actual D&D game, but I kinda like to think of health potions like the water from the holy grail at the end of Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade.
there's actually official rules for variant resting.
Heroic resting is a variant where a short rest takes 5 minutes, and a long rest takes an hour, and then there's Gritty Realism, where a short rest is 8 hours, and a long rest is 7 days of non adventuring.
When it comes to flanking, me and my friends do use it, but we've modified it to simply give a +2 to hit instead of advantage.
Overall, we've found it to be a lot more balanced, since it encourages positioning but doesn't make you and your friends into crit farming machines, especially if you have Elven Accuracy, so I recommend trying it out.
The problem with Lawful Good Paladins (and any other class, for that matter) is that people tend to play them as Lawful Stupid - that the character is so hide bound and inflexible that they make very bad decisions "because that is what my character would do". Alignment is meant as a guide, not a straight-jacket. Good doesn't always do good things, Evil doesn't always do evil things, life just isn't that cut and dry. Often the "evil" guy plays the part of the good and righteous leader, keeping his evil side in the shadows. The "good" guy, on the other hand, can do bad things in the name of the greater good. They can even be unsure if any particular action is good or bad, to the point of a tortured consciences.
For me, the one rule I want to know where it came from is "Holding" your action. As opposed to taking the ready action, "Holding" your action replaces your position in Initiative. Letting you take a full turn immediately after another creature's turn, as opposed to using your reaction to make one action.
I have no clue where this came from. It's not in Pathfinder, it's not in DND, in any of the editions. I have zero idea where this came from, and it scares me.
Listing flanking because it's an optional rule is like listing feats, which are also an optional rule (PHB 165). It's also weird that you brought up rest variants as "definitely not official" when they're both on DMG page 267.
the deal I notice in some games I play or run when it comes to alignment is that mostly people ether just want to be chaotic neutral and do whatever they want, or want to play evil and play out their anger/frustration/darker urges. Examples are paladins who don't mind killing or doing slaughter(or were on a oath and were not following it at all while not being called oathbreakers), clerics who will let people die, wizards who will do fireball even if it kills a party member, etc. Don't get me wrong it can be fun to play some characters like that, but when like 3 of a 4 man party are like that, and that they do it in every game for years, it can get stale. Whenever a rule on not allowing CN or evil alignment characters get placed in a session 0 (or a restriction to where only one person can play CN or evil), a lot of the players lose interest. Last time this was done they thought backing out would derail and stop the game, until they noticed that there were five other people who wanted to play and were ok with the rule(also found out two of them were also constantly in games to where "everyone played evil all the time").
Personally, I changed flanking to give a +2 to your attack rolls, but you can't flank an enemy while you're being flanked, thus getting rid of the conga-lines.
3:01 I remember our DM tried to fix that by making potions expire in order to avoid us hoarding potions. The only thing it made this far is cause our healing potions to turn into potions of harm (we had them for months, so, I guess it ended up turning into a ). I guess some habits die hard, even if there is a punishment for it
4:54 That one is funny. I was in a campaign where we tried to use flanking as much as possible. There was a combat in which we were extremely unlucky and the enemies also tried to flank us. We missed all the attacks even though we had advantage, and the enemy kept critting and we almost die to a random encounter that the DM wasn't even expecting that we would have trouble with. After that, when the enemies benefit from the flanking rules, we jokingly say we are going aboard the flanking train. Didn't know it was so common as to have a term. Also, the conga line also feels appropiate.
Flanking is a rule that makes sense from a realist perspective but so is bullets taking someone down in one hit and fps games routinely break that element of realism for the sake of fun so I guess it depends on how realistic you want you combat in D&D to be.
me and my friends run an alt version of flanking for advantage. instead of adv we get a +2 to the rate we hit them, and if they are surrounded it increases by +5. it's pretty handy honestly.
Personally I quite enjoyed class restrictions by alignment and whenever I play a class in 5e, I adhere to the 3e and Pathfinder restrictions. That being said, I don't try to make others play my way as that would be pretty disrespectful to them and probably ruin their enjoyment.
Also as a minor correction: Cleric wasn't ever restricted to being Good aligned. It was restricted to Non-Neutral in 1e as well as AD&D and then got changed to being within one step of their deity's alignment in 3e.
Regarding spell components, I do actually use them, but instead than having costly and non-costly, with the formers being defined just by having some form of pricing, I have rarities. Only the "very common" ones are available in unlimited quantities, if you have a spell pouch. All the rest must be bought, accounted for, and carried around, with availability being tied to rarity. A rare spell component can only be found in a big city, and a single ultra-rare one requires either a very long downtime research or a dedicated expedition to be found. The rarer, the pricer, too. Every single spell in my games requires components, even cantrips, although these only require very common ones.
That doesn't mean casters do not have troubles. Spell pouches can be stolen, destroyed and such, and the same goes for focus items. In my opinion, spell components are much like "ammo for magic" while focuses are much like "weapons for magic". And they have to be equipped as such too.
About administering a potion, the problem is not much what action is required for it, but all the other actions you need to perform to be actually able to administer it. These are things like actually drawing out the required potion, passing it to the character which is going to administer it if different, reaching the character in need, and so on. In the worst cases, it could take several rounds to pull out that stunt. I've noticed that almost no one remembers that all that is necessary too.
My DM has a homebrew rule for NAT 1's if you are making a ranged attack and there is a party member near where you are aiming they need to roll a DEX to avoid friendly fire. On the other hand if you are making a melee attack and roll a NAT 1 you need to make a DEX save or lose a grip on your weapon.
As a GM, i take "official" rules and wave at them as I walk them out of the house on game night
Nat 20s in 5e double the rolled dice in the books
PHB pg. 196
"When you score a critical hit, you get to roll extra dice for the attack's damage against the target.-"
And
PHB pg. 194
"If the d20 roll for an attack is a 20, the attack hits regardless of any modifiers or the target's AC. This is called a critical hit-"
So no, rolling a Nat 20 doesn't just hit the target, it's a critical hit, and you're told to roll extra dice for it.
This is specific to attack rolls however, things that ask you for an attack roll are subject to critical hit rules, which explicitly includes dice added on because of the critical hit, such as sneak attack and smite also being doubled
I think a lot of people forgot that feats are an optional rule… although it will be part of the core rules in One DnD
Crits on abilities are not a homebrew but are stated as an optional rule in DMG p.242. One of my players would swear up and down that abilities can't crit due to their fear of failing but we're always fist in line to try and declare flanking... Which I didnt use... Ever.
I mean, there's a built-in method of ignoring spell components. It doesn't work on consumed components and components with GP costs, but ignoring components is in the official rules.
i like the idea of a potion being poured over a wound like peroxide, and a drinking it would help with wounds throughout the body.
the crit roll is because in most other editions crits are very much a thing, and shows or movies didn't wait for 5e to make dnd references
It’s crazy because I was actually just looking at the flanking rules and thinking that’s excessive
Alignments are actually very good concept. Deleting them is a bit dumb. At least they can be re-tooled as sort of Karma-like system.
Almost touched on it with that first one, but the most common mistake that I see everywhere is the idea that rolling a 1 always fails, or rolling a 20 always succeeds. That's not a thing. It's a rule for attacks in combat, and for death saves, but not for any other roll. Doesn't help that BG3 uses that house rule.