10 More Huge Rules Changes in the 2024 Players Handbook

[@Joik2]

30:06 “I’m not biased I’m correct.” 10/10 dungeon dudes quote

[@M_M_ODonnell]

The "invisible" condition really seems like it needs a better name. I don't know whether "hidden" or "unseen" or something else would be less confusing, but "invisible" is just so loaded, particularly in settings where people can become _literally_ invisible.

[@PSquared-oo7vq]

Someone in the comments already came up with it, IMO: "concealed."

[@burntcustard]

I like "unseen". Makes it clear that spells that rely on sight cannot target you while you have the status.

[@chrisg8989]

@@M_M_ODonnell I think they chose Invisible purposefully because it is exactly the same whether you cast Invisible on yourself or successfully hide from someone and gain the Invisible condition.

[@abdulazizmohammed8797]

So see invisibility exists.....

[@murphieslaw6932]

I´d vouch for 'hidden', but 'concealed' is fine, too. Delivers the sense of the rules much better, either way.

[@madisonmcclure8243]

I very much wish that shields came with their own “weapon” mastery feature.

[@Crowsinger]

You could make them resist weapon masteries if their wielders have proficiency in their usage.

[@Itomon]

Any suggestions on what would those be?

[@joshholmes1372]

Agreed. A simple bonus action shield bash like the old shield master feat used to give. Or the ability to use a reaction to boost ac a bit or if you block an attack a reaction to make a counter. Something

[@madisonmcclure8243]

@@Crowsinger , @Itomon - Extra AC Boost for a Single Hit - A chance to stun one target that melee attacks you as a reaction. Something like that.

[@madisonmcclure8243]

@@joshholmes1372 Exactly.

[@bigdream_dreambig]

For hiding in plain sight, my GM has us do a Charisma (Stealth) check. It's not for us to try to be unseen, but rather for us to try to go unnoticed by appearing to belong there.

[@murphieslaw6932]

Let´s call it 'blending in', that seems reasonable. Maybe use advantage or disadvantage, depending on your outfit/race/knowledge about customs. Even if you successfully used a disguise, this check makes a lot of sense in many situations. "Wait - do you even belong here ?" and the corresponding subterfuge check only need be done IF you actually draw attention in the first place ! Love the idea.

[@ivoryinkwell7864]

Especially on a crowded battlefield. One of the things I am thinking about implementing at my table is... There is so much chaos going on you can use that to try and hide in plain sight or if you have a party member who is in one of those "I can't do anything, and I feel useless" situations, the two of you can coordinate so they can use the Help Action to try and garner attention of the foes around you and distracting them somehow with an insult or Thaumaturgy or whatever so you can sneak across the battlefield. Are there foes who could *potentially* see you trying to slip away amidst the chaos? Yes. But that doesn't mean they are going to successfully notice you. Especially if they are engaged in a direct combat with someone beause that foe is busy trying to stay alive. There are a lot of ways to have someone move around sneakily in the middle of combat.

[@DnDDeepDive]

Just to emphasize something Monty said: It makes me a little nuts that they hint at there being a skill (not just ability) tied to each tool that should give you advantage with tool checks if you’re proficient in the related skill, but then, when you go to tools, there’s no corresponding skill listed. Just an ability. Makes me feel like something was forgotten on WotC’s part… 🤔

[@sporksabre]

Agreed. As someone who loves playing as an artificer, a more definitive systems for how tools could be used would be nice. (Granted there is no artificer in 2024 yet) But having tools attached to a skill in one part, and attached to an ability in another sound like it will be frustrating for people wanting to try useing tools.

[@sporksabre]

Depending on how it is actualy written when i can get my hands on the new PHB might change my mind; but i plan to use the tool as the skill, and see how my players use it to determine the ability. Like I am doing. Ie: the magnifying glass from tinkers tools to search the fireplace. Tool + int.... the hand toold from tinkers tools to disarm the trap in said fireplace; tool + dex

[@ltcaphide]

i suppose thats all the more reason to pick the skill on a case by case basis like the dudes suggested here but its definitely something that couldve been codified better

[@sporksabre]

@@ltcaphide exactly

[@teppicxxviii9744]

Maybe will they expand on that in the DMG or Xanathar25 ?

[@bretgregersen9826]

The new invisible rules aren't bad, but the term is. You are concealed, not invisible....

[@arcturuslight_]

The new rules also make it unclear on whether your position can be tracked by sound and tracks when either invisible or hidden

[@brettthomas2652]

I would argue that you are, in fact, invisible (not visible) to the person from whom you are successfully hiding. I do agree that it being technically correct does not make it less confusing though. Why not just call it the "hidden" condition? 😂

[@dndelver]

Should've been renamed to "Unseen" and it would make perfect sense, I guess they just figured it would've caused more confusion to rename the condition itself.

[@perryfox6060]

Agreed. The condition should have been "Hidden" or "Concealed". Definitely not "Invisible"...

[@Itomon]

The good thing of using Unseen instead of Invisible, is to have a great parallel with Unheard for the element of staying hidden

[@Silver_Anchor]

22:33 as my professor always said “It’s not about being right, it’s about making others believe you’re right.”

[@WalterRiggs]

“Invisible” condition should be called “Unseen” or something else

[@arcturuslight_]

@@WalterRiggs my take is that neither invisible nor hidden should be conditions.

[@xxthevampirate]

And then invisible would make you unseen and not invisible. Also invisible just means not visible so it applies and allows for more interesting ways to define and describe how you are invisible naritivly

[@shawnmayo8210]

@@arcturuslight_ Invisible is a status and hidden as well. Even if we use condition instead of that word, the cumbersome part is sharing "invisible" across different meanings.

[@shawnmayo8210]

@@xxthevampirate which is what being hidden means. That's the better use. Cover allows you to potentially be hidden, while the invisible spell is self explanatory and didn't need a rule to obfuscate it.

[@emerynoel567]

Using the term "invisible" when you're visible is just a stupid and avoidable disaster. Not visible, hidden, unseen, all viable choices. And no, "invisible" and "not visible" do NOT mean the same thing linguistically.

[@Mr_Maiq_The_Liar]

The dehydration rules still require twice the daily amount of water that a company that sells water recommends to people who exercise in the summer heat, and 5 times the actual actual minimum amount it would take to not die. I'm surprised by how little research they did about that. It would have also been much easier to track if it wasn't based off volume, but pound, since the inventory is based on pounds, and the waterskin holds an unknown volume of water that weighs 3 lbs, and I don't have to do math to know that this is 0.375 gallons and I need to drink 3 full water skins a day

[@murphieslaw6932]

Well, that is ridiculous, indeed ! Also a shining example for why, literally, everyone else in the world uses the metrical system (including NASA, ironically) ! I will always know that 100 ml of water weigh 100g, since metric is based on waters density of 1. Practical, right ? ^^ Imperial is so darn impractical, it blows my mind. Let´s measure distance in limbs, size in the size of other things - like uuuh, a big rock roughly the size of a small rock ? Huh ? WTF ? Or use some odd units from the middle ages, based on the volume of fairy farts ! Sure ! Great idea, do that +facepalm+ Sure hope the German version will have the units converted, so I don´t have to break out the trusty ´ol calculator. Again...

[@ssteele1812]

Totally agree on the weight vs volume thing. However, if you read the dehydration rule, it specifically states that drinking less than half of the required amount results in exhaustion so the "Twice what is recommenced for exercising in summer" tracks.

[@teppicxxviii9744]

And drinking too much water on a regular basis (>5L/d depending on health status) is poisonous.

[@haydenstockwell252]

My group has always used the term “bloodied” for 5E. There have been many monster type-specific alternatives throughout the years, such as “oiled” for constructs and “ichorous” for fiends.

[@RottenRogerDM]

WHA. WHINE. WHIMPER. I just got my players to QUIT using the word bloodied. WHA WHIMPER. Of course I put the AC and HP out on the white board.

[@runk3216]

@@RottenRogerDMwhat

[@RottenRogerDM]

@@runk3216 QUIT QUIT using Blooded. I finally got my players to quit using the word. Thanks for catching the spelling.

[@streetstroller]

Don't forget lubed.

[@tuomasronnberg5244]

​@@RottenRogerDMI always tell my players when a monster is bloodied (half health or under) and at death's door (even the minimum damage they can roll is enough to kill it).

[@galensturupcomeau1242]

You two looked awesome in the D&D Direct! Congratulations!

[@DungeonDudes]

Thank you!!

[@elementzero3379]

​​@@DungeonDudesMy wife saw me watching and said, "Hey, it's the Dudes!" She's always recognized you guys from my viewing your channel; but my recent binging of "Dungeons of Drakkenheim" has increased her familiarity. It was great to see you guys, and I'm excited at the implication that more of your books will feature in the DnDBeyond marketplace.

[@deamonsdarkness7157]

​@@DungeonDudes DM's should have more guild lines or restrictions but not with this but the divination wizard cause I hate when the DM goes "it doesn't tell you anything cause I say so" it frustrated me to no end

[@zacklarez]

yep. total bosses. legit af

[@CharlesUrban]

Wait...so the only requirement for using Heavy melee weapons is a high Strength score? So the "Crazed Gnome Barbarian with a Greataxe Twice As Tall As He Is" build is a go?

[@arcturuslight_]

yes, that's what the community has been asking and they listened

[@CharlesUrban]

@@arcturuslight_ Most. Excellent.

[@nathans9764]

About time. New Gnome barbarian will have advantage on all saves except con from level 2.

[@DSpiritwolf]

Grappling people with the elements monk is so wild because that basically means you're grappling them with fire damage from a distance. That's cool as hell.

[@99xplord]

For real, I'm pretty excited to make a Goliath Warrior of the Elements Monk. You can move so fast and so far, better if you have a Druid or Ranger team mate to give you spike growth, you can fly over it for like 150 ft.

[@dndelver]

Pretty sure it would also work for Astral Self Monk as well

[@CharlesUrban]

@@DSpiritwolf It's easy to flavor in a cool way, too. You can say you're trapping your opponent in a tiny tornado while lighting them up with lightning/fire/etc. damage. Maybe the tornado is a baby Air Elemental that you befriended during your training and who you summon only to help you grapple things. Name it after the most infamous storm that you know.

[@Baily16]

Not sure if that works according to RAW though. I think it specifies your reach is increased for attacks, but it doesn't say your reach is increased as a whole for everything.

[@dndelver]

@@Baily16 grappling doesn't mention anywhere the range that you can make it from, just that you can Grapple as an Unarmed Strike, it's Unarmed Strike mentions a range of 5 feet and things like Astral Self and Way of the Elements say the range of your Unarmed Strike (which grapple counts as) is extended by 5/10 feet. So from that anything that extends range of Unarmed Strikes extends the range of Grappling.

[@ARatherDapperTapir]

Can confirm, exhaustion being an active threat has made my players a LOT more cautious.

[@Itomon]

I think the best compromise about Exaustion affecting Death saving throws is: For each level of exaustion, the number required to count as a success for a Death Saving throw is increased by 2; but it doesn't count as a failure unless its 9 or less. So a person with 3 Exaustion would require to roll a 16 on their Death saving throw, but anything between 10-15 doesn't give them a Failure (you take longer to wake, but slipping towards death is about the same rate in luck and chance) To deepen things even further, an automatic sucess (nat 20) while Exausted would not give 1 HP and end the incapacitated condition, instead, it just stablizes with 0 HP instead.

[@ARatherDapperTapir]

@@Itomon so, above 5 exhaustion in the new system puts you in a coma? Interesting idea, but in some ways it's just more complication

[@harkthesound32]

The influence action feels to me more like it was designed for influencing NPCs in combat or initiative. The dragon spots you in it's hoard. Roll initiative. I'd like to jump out from cover and wave a white flag and yell 'parlay!' The dragon is hostile (angry you snuck in the lair) and hesitant but not unwilling to bargain. Roll persuasion with disadvantage.

[@shawnmayo8210]

I also like intimidating mooks to run away (removing them from combat). I suspect this is going to be a cumbersome mechanic that didn't need to be there.

[@brilobox2]

@@shawnmayo8210 or its codifying that if you want to try and do speech warfare in combat it requires an action.

[@shawnmayo8210]

@@brilobox2 exactly the problem. Speech was always a free action. Don't make a rule to make things cumbersome. Unless it's a class feature where you spend more time thematically on top of getting a mechanical benefit, there's zero reason for this.

[@murphieslaw6932]

​@@shawnmayo8210 Well, yes and no. Speech is a free action for a FEW, FEW WORDS. Not trying to convince someone while, simultaneously, kicking their ass with five attacks. The new rule tells us 'choose one' and I am cool with that. Also, long monologues in combat are forbidden by this, and I love that rule, too. Monologueing in combat is only for NPCs (aka the DM´s BBEG) only ; D

[@Kayzu87]

It's so amazing to see that you guys were on D&D announcement video. You guys always offer well thought out explanations and offer opinions in a reasonable way.

[@fatewalker]

20:33 I really like the tables of social interaction in the 2014 DMG. I like these new rules too, but I hope to see an update to those tables in the DMG.

[@guamae]

I've been using "Heavily Wounded" for half health, and "Last Legs" for quarter health, and I really like the practical immersion of it. We do it for party members also, we don't share hp values, but the Healer can glance around the battlefield and see who's below half, or below a quarter.

[@jaakkosippola7191]

I interpreted equipping and unequipping differently. You can do it part of the attack, but you can do it with one weapon during the action. So you can equip or unequip only once per action.

[@wirtslegacy]

That's how I interpreted it, as well: "You can either equip or unequip *one* weapon when you make an attack with this *action* ". I don't interpret that as being able to swamp out for each attack.

[@jaakkosippola7191]

@@wirtslegacy i hope that in an faq this will be clarified. Just in case. Tho I don’t like the idea that dropping a weapon is categorized in the unequip section. It artificially makes it harder to go from melee to ranged weapons.

[@stephenjames2377]

The fact that an attack and an attack action are different things in D&D is an endless source of confusion. 😆

[@Lrbearclaw]

29:20 - The thing about Burning is that in the DMG (2014) it clearly states how mundane elemental damage is 1d4. Any more damage is magical. So a natural fire is only 1d4 (and Tieflings are canonically immune to natural fire and heat).

[@riccardopezzani]

Well in a game where commoners have 4hp that makes sense... it's just connected to the general problem of balancing players and monsters/NPCs

[@armorclasshero2103]

​@@riccardopezzaniwhen's the last time you heard someone die from a single burn on the stove? Never. So it doesn't make sense.

[@riccardopezzani]

@@armorclasshero2103 1-4 it's the total range of "natural elemental damage", so it can go from a stove burn (1) to being in a wildfire in a dry forest (4), or at least that's how I interpreted it

[@Smeelio]

I really like the new Search & Study, though I hope they've got a small line saying what creatures types full under where should change based on setting Of course, nothing stopping people changing it anyway, but it's nice when they build it in so people don't have to worry they are breaking balance as much, like how they explicitly say under Monk "you can reflavour your weapons to suit martial arts better" and things like that I can see Fey being under History or Arcana in certain settings, for example, or Constructs in History, and so on and so forth

[@polvotierno]

I agree with Monty about not using exhaustion for death saves. My reason, from what I understand, is that death saves do not use modifiers, and exhaustion only affects checks that can use modifiers.

[@shawnmayo8210]

yeah it's a harsh enough mechanic in a hero fantasy. You'll end up rolling death saves soon enough if you're being exhausted. Why pile that on?

[@murphieslaw6932]

@@shawnmayo8210 Amen !

[@logancuster8035]

Then death saves shouldn’t use any modifiers.

[@AwesomeWookiee]

​@@logancuster8035They don't.

[@jkpsimplicio]

I mean, RAW, exhaustion does apply to death saves. So does anything that affects d20 Tests. You can house rule otherwise, but it isn't an "interpretation", it's just how the rule is written. The upside is that anything that directly affects a d20 Test interacts with death saves, like Bless or Bardic Inspiration.

[@Baily16]

I'm really looking forward to playing a Monk Goliath with Hill's Tumble and the Grappler feat. Grappling is already one of my favorite things to do as a martial character, and now it seems way more impactful. I am curious to see how easy it is to land a grapple though. Especially at later tiers of play, creatures tend to have really good STR and DEX saving throws. So getting a grapple off might be pretty difficult, even if the effect is way stronger now.

[@TheJakeJackson]

It will be great for the following reason: 2014 grappling required the grab to be made as part of the attack action, limiting you to 2 attempts per turn. With advantage, you could make 4 rolls per round to attempt a grab. Now, from level 10 onwards, a monk can attempt 5 grabs per turn because they can turn flurry of blows into grapple attempts. That's 5 rolls, but as soon as one succeeds any of the remaining rolls can be attempts to damage or shove prone. That's much more effective. You can even grapple as an opportunity attack! 6 attempts per round! The only thing you lose is the ability to dip into rogue for athletics expertise, so consider it a trade-off. And if you play a way of mercy monk it's not really a trade-off at all! When you grab someone, they get a saving throw to avoid it. But once someone is grabbed, to escape they must make an ABILITY CHECK on their turn as their action. Way of mercy monks can poison targets they hit with an unarmed attack, giving them disadvantage on ability checks. Giving a target disadvantage on escape attempts as part of your normal attacks while also getting 50% more attempts per round and maximum movement speed from the feat feels a little better than expertise. Grappling has improved. Note that there is still one grappling ability that specifically requires the attack action: the "punch and grab" skill from the grappler feat. That lets you deal damage AND grab, but not during flurry of blows or attacks of opportunity. Also, watch out for crafty DMs. It's very easy to break a grapple if another creature runs up and shoves the one you're grappling out of your range. Because they're teammates they don't even need to roll, they can just agree to fail the save and get pushed. If you are ever grappling two creatures, make sure to not hold them next to each other so they can't do this.

[@murphieslaw6932]

@@TheJakeJackson That is ... terrifying ! Lovely, thanks for the insight. Gotta convince someone in my group to play this - I can´t possibly prepare a fourth hero, it will take years to play the three I already decided upon ! ^^

[@nadirku]

One thing I am unhappy with about the Tool Proficiencies is that there seem to be a number of ways players can inadvertently prevent themselves from gaining Tool Proficiencies they would otherwise get, and it feels like the designers are undermining the efforts to make Tool Proficiencies more meaningful... For example, if you choose the Criminal, or Wayfarer background, and then Rogue as your base class you miss out on a Tool Proficiency due to having two things that grant Tool Proficiency with Thieves' Tools. Other places I have noticed where if you have the Tool Proficiency from somewhere else, you will end up missing out on gaining a Tool Proficiency are the Assassin Subclass (Poisoner's Kit, and/or Disguise Kit), the Poisoner feat (Poisoner Kit), and the Chef feat (Cook's Utensils). Unless/until WotC edits these features, and/or creates a general rule for what to do if you gain a specific Tool Proficiency, but already have that Tool Proficiency, I am going to push for a homebrew rule to let players choose to gain an alternative Tool Proficiency of their choice if they would gain a specific Tool Proficiency they already have (For more restrictive tables, there could be limits to which proficiencies can be gained from a given feature, like the Poisoner feat letting you choose between "Alchemist's Supplies", "Brewer's Supplies", "Cook's Utensils", and "Herbalism Kit" as backup Tool Proficiencies).

[@shawnmayo8210]

Usually the verbiage has that rule about "if you already know this then choose something else". Maybe they could suggest some related tools too.

[@nadirku]

@@shawnmayo8210 right, if I am remembering correctly, the 2024 Keen Mind feat has that type of rule already. It should grant Skill Proficiency with Investigation, or if you already have that Skill Proficiency it will let you choose to either gain Proficiency with one of several Intelligence Skills (like Arcana, and History), or let you gain Expertise in Investigation. I really wish the Tool Proficiency granting features also had those kinds of alternatives that are already baked into the Skill Proficiency granting features.

[@brilobox2]

This is only a problem if you aren’t making a custom origin, and if you aren’t doing custom origins you are playing wrong. No ifs ands or buts, you’re just imposing pointless limitations.

[@nadirku]

​@@brilobox2 I would disagree, I think the aspect of the rules I am complaining about might actually be made worse if all your table is doing is letting players create homebrew backgrounds. People who use a custom homebrew background to get Cook's Utensils Proficiency will still run into the anti-combo of then not gaining a Tool Proficiency if they take the RAW Chef feat, with something similar happening between Tool Proficiency with Poisoner's Kit, and the Poisoner feat. Custom backgrounds would help prevent doubling up on Tool Proficiency with Thieves' Tools for characters who start as Rogues, but would not prevent the kind of anti-combo I am complaining about for people who might want to multi-class into Rogues at a later level. Also, the Assassin subclass would still have the same potential, if not a worse potential, of being an anti-combo for anyone who creates a custom background that includes Tool Proficiency with Disguise Kits, or Poisoner's Kits. The thing I am complaining about ties into character backgrounds, but is not limited to character backgrounds, whether those backgrounds are RAW, or custom homebrew.

[@brilobox2]

@@nadirku then clearly any GM with 2 neurons to rub together would either let you take another somewhat related tool proficiency or give you an ‘expertise’ of sorts with the tool in question, some kind of bone. Writing in every possible instance ‘if you already have x proficiency you can pick something completely different’ to account for people who didn’t plan their characters well would be a waste of ink and be nonsensical.

[@sporksabre]

On equipping and unequipping: this is how we have been playing for a while now. It is even a running joke that my fighter has to go back around the battlefield and pick up all his dropped weapons after the battle. [Edit: spelling and punctuation]

[@Dxella]

Been playing with a similar exhaustion rule for quite a while at our table. Exhaustion levels now have 10 levels, each give a cumulative -1 penalty to all attacks, ability, saving throws And even death saves at the higher levels of exhaustion. We had great sucess with this and we have modified healers kit to include that during a long rest a creature can spend 1 use of a healers kit to apply help to another creature to get recover an additional point of exhaustion. 1. -1 2. -2 3. -3 4. -4 5. -5, -5ft 6. -6, Death saves -1, -10ft 7. -7, Death saves -2, -15ft 8. -8, Death saves -3, -20ft 9. -9, Death saves -4, -25ft 10. -10, Death saves -5, -30ft - Beyond lies death -

[@jamesdosdall8391]

I was hoping for some sort of change to the rules about invisibility and hiding, because they were confusing . . . I'm not sure if this does it, though. I'd be interested to see the specific wording of the "invisibility" spell and the "invisibility" condition. I have had more than one DM insist that my character cannot attack their spellcaster or monster who has turned invisible without making a perception check to find them first, because I don't know where they are. That is NOT how invisibility works; invisibility only gives you disadvantage on your attacks against that creature UNLESS that creature ALSO takes the "hide" action (which is now the "conceal" action?) I'm hoping there's some sort of caveat somewhere in the new rules that specifies that a concealed or invisible creature has not necessarily "disappeared" completely from the map. For example, a wizard that has used the Invisibility spell can still be heard unless they take specific measures to conceal themselves, and a monster would still know the location (and thus could attack) a rogue who has concealed themselves behind a pillar to get advantage on their attacks (in this case, I would flavor the "invisible" condition as a "they've momentarily lost track of you and don't know which side of the pillar you're going to emerge from for your next attack" sort of thing). I'm also wondering about the process of "finding" a concealed creature . . . if a creature now can gain the "invisibility" condition with a DC 15 check, how is that going to interact with passive perception or active perception on creatures or characters who have crazy good perception? Will it still be a full action to make a perception check?

[@shawnmayo8210]

I'm not sold either and they've now obfuscated it. "Hidden" makes far far more sense when hiding behind boxes. Cover applies and it's clear about your visibility level BUT distinctly isn't invisible which is a whole magical concept.

[@soldierbreed]

Might even be worth taken The grappler feet on a druid for some of them wildshapes that grapple on hit. Assumeing thats still the case

[@bretgregersen9826]

I GM Pathfinder2e and I am super easy going about how many items you are holding and what you can do while holding them, etc. I agree the rules as written are a lot on that topic

[@brilobox2]

Those rules are heavily codified in P2e because item interactions within the action economy are something designed to be thought about in terms of opportunity cost.

[@beahootiful]

My group plays 5e version of Dark Sun. We already sort of use the "study" bonus action in a way, but we use it at a free action. If one of us asks our DM "what do I know about x creature's strengths or weaknesses or abilities?" our dm will have us make a skill check that relates (usually nature, history, or religion) and give us some info based on our roll. Sometimes we might ask, "are there any physical weak spots I can see or are they behaving a way that might indicate a weakness?" which might result in us making an investigation, perception, medicine, or insight check. It works really great and encourages the players to think more tactically.

[@A1990MusicMan]

Your burning condition does sound better! I'm looking forward to purchasing your monster book, but I'm going to incorporate a homebrew version of that rule until the book drops!

[@jelte3754]

Your Burning condition is really cool! Happy Wizards is including something similar :)

[@GaspardSavoureux01]

I'm playing a rogue in Pathfinder 2. When you get level 15, you can actually do the Skyrim crouch and hide in plain sight.

[@Itomon]

PF is a different level of Superhero Medieval Fantasy. Not unlike D&D itself xD

[@shawnmayo8210]

And in PF2 you can take a skill to make you objectively worse at healing and even though the witch is actively harming the city you need to wait a week and a half to almost be healed fully at those early levels. I was surprised they didn't fix anything at all after their beta test years ago.

[@Davidstock-tv1lv]

Not a knock to Pathfinder but it is a lot more crunchy and tactical then d&d so it plays more like a video game

[@devinsimon7721]

That's dumb.

[@shawnmayo8210]

@@Davidstock-tv1lv I don't think I've ever felt it be more tactical at all. Crunch, surely. But to it's own detriment once you start hitting level 12 and there's exceptions to exceptions that take way too long at the table.

[@ezekielzauner4245]

its sounds to me like you can only draw or put away a weapon per each attack. So, you cannot draw a weapon attack with that weapon then stow it all as one attack of your extra attack. For example if you already have a weapon drawn you can use it then put it away as the first attack. Then draw and attack with another weapon then you end your second attack with that weapon drawn. I do not think the RAW is you can draw and stow as a part of the same attack. you get to draw or stow with each attack.

[@kennyshack2006]

Bloodied is great. A friend of mine shared with me this shift he used and I have used it ever since. 75% or lower is wounded, 50% is blooded, 25% or lower is critical condition. My players love it.

[@LithmusEarth]

This is the video I was waiting on, a bunch of catch-alls people weren't talking about. Thank you so much, it's just really late to the party/discussion. 34:40 in my current house rules, I just hand-waive all hand interactions except for passing items between players. It just seems like a lot of bookkeeping that i don't always want to engage in.

[@GLiTcHy-Y]

In a game I’m playing with one of my dms, he has a cool homebrew rule where is you go down and get picked up, then you’ll gain 1 level of exuastion for every other time you go down nd get picked up, so the 2nd, 4th, 6th, and etc time you get healed from being knocked unconscious, you gain an exuastion level, so it feels more meaningful and we have more of an incentive to heal before we go down so we don’t suffer the negative in hopes we survive the next hit we take

[@Bookworm159]

Thank you so much. I kept hearing that grappling was an unarmed strike, so I was assuming you had to hit the creature with an unarmed strike to force the saving throw. Thanks for explaining how it actually works.

[@TheJakeJackson]

To note: you do have to hit with an unarmed strike first to use the grappler feat's "punch and grab" ability, which lets you both deal damage and attempt to grab. But that's just for that one ability.

[@danbarham2520]

As a teacher of rhetoric, I was a bit stoked when Monty was talking about using all three of Aristotle's appeals: logos (intelligence), pathos (wisdom), and ethos (charisma). A cool take on convincing roleplay!

[@highmarshal528]

when it comes to the new bloodied rules, ive always used Winded (75%), Bloodied (50%), Beaten (25%), and On Deaths Door (10%)

[@SeanClaudeVanQuam]

Regarding which knowledge skills regard to which monsters? I think there should be some overlap. Fey could be both Arcana and Nature, and monstrosities could be the same. Dragons could be Arcana and Nature as well, and maybe History as well. All of them are magical creatures with ties to nature, and dragons are ancient beings.

[@Hyruler]

Light - When you take the Attack action on your turn and attack with a Light weapon, you can make one extra attack as a Bonus Action later on the same turn. That extra attack must be made with a different Light weapon, and you don’t add your ability modifier to the extra attack’s damage unless that modifier is negative. For example, you can attack with a Shortsword in one hand and a Dagger in the OTHER (hand) using the Attack action and a Bonus Action. The example is showing the other hand part. It needs to be added in the 1st sentence to be more clear.

[@joeriandroog1925]

I love the social encounter examples as a beginning dm with beginning players

[@FirstNameLastName-my7ct]

Agreed, definitely have had players who tried to use persuasion as if it was basically mind control.

[@levimote]

Thank you for doing Good Faith readings and interpretations!

[@SeanCSHConsulting]

Wow, I sure won't be spending any more money on these rules. Thanks, Dudes. Excellent work, as always.

[@Exaltable]

All I can think about for the weapon swapping rules is a DMC Dante combo video and I love it.

[@FixDnD]

You‘re pointing out the rules in a way they interact, that I would have needed months to discover - so thanks for all of your videos!

[@ADT1995]

Honestly "I like my houserule better, it's more flexible, tun, and nuanced" sums up a lot of my problems with the rules changes Most things I wanted to change (including rangers, monks, making more fighting styles viable, making weapon choices feel unique) I did a long time ago, and usually I like my fix better Some things like the influence action I just don't like at all, but a lot of the reason I don't want to switch (and my group is unanimous on this, which is the first time that's happened since I introduced the Perkins crit) is because we like either what I or JC (the other main DM in our group) came up with. We like my ranger better, JCs crafting rules better, Sam's monk better, my weapon modifications, JCs feats, and the list goes on.

[@BrentDnD]

That's funny you mention the goliath monk grappler build. I just started a new campaign as a goliath monk. We are level 2, so I haven't picked my subclass yet, but I'm liking this idea.

[@mazmazmazmazmazmaz]

The study action is great because it allows players use bridge metagaming and character knowledge. If I see an ice monster, I as the player the player knows its weak to fire, but now all it takes is a nonus action for my character to study the creature and now its not metagaming if they act on the knowledge.

[@mikecarson7769]

Many thanks for continuing your awesome videos with the new 2024 rules! Your videos consistently deliver useful information with friendly advice and examples.

[@TheAlbertron42]

The way I rule weapon switching at my table is that unless you have a free hand it requires a bonus action to swap weapons outside of the free action "draw/stow" that's part of movement. This feels better martial classes that might not need to use their bonus action for anything else and it forces other classes, like rogue, to work with their teammates more in terms of chosing melee or ranged targets. I can see how some people might not like this but it works for us and my players love how it clears up the ruling.

[@Zixor_]

I personally like the trend in this players handbook of leaving certain gray areas up to the DM, like when hiding is possible. It gives the DM latitude to use their own logic or intuition without being burdened by player facing strict rules. I do hope this approach is paired with guidance in the DMG on how to make calls in these gray areas. For instance, if a hidden rogue leaps out of cover to charge an enemy and make a melee attack, do they benefit from being hidden when they make the attack? A good rule of thumb could be that charging 10 or fewer feet doesn’t spoil the hidden condition before the attack, or to consider what direction the enemies might have been facing based on other threats.

[@brilobox2]

Same with Surprise. DM decides if a creature has disadvantage on initiative but players control giving themselves advantage on initiative.

[@lukesandadordoceu4835]

I think the types of check you can make with the study action is about knowledge of the creature type, to find out about strengths, weaknesses and stuff like that the idea of using history for dragons would probably be more to find out about a dragons existance or place of origin or something like that

[@mrr4ven69]

I'm thankful you picked up the exhaustion and death saves again. After your last video and getting my own copy of the rules yesterday, I read it and disagreed with your statement of the last video. The way I read it is: a death SAVE is a saving throw. So it counts as a d20 test to me. The difference is: there is no ability modifier or proficiency that applies to it. And then i thought exaclty what you just said: if you're at exhaustion lvl 5, you will should have a harder time bouncing back into life than just going unconcious without any exhaustion.

[@JeffPom]

I wish your entire videos were more like when you're talking to each other. Like at about 6 minutes here... more comfortable and conversation like. Less stiff. Love the information you guys bring - and the discussions about it!

[@garion046]

It's always going to feel smoother when natural conversation is occurring, but trying to record a video on a topic with essentially no script is a recipe for a million hours of recording and editing and inefficient info delivery. It's good to splice in natural chats, but you need a script.

[@galensturupcomeau1242]

Ranged Heavy weapons. I thought that it was weird that dex 13 is a prerequisite instead of strength 13. It is that the weapon is heavy and you need enough strength.

[@Bookworm159]

I mean, the longbow is classified as heavy, but I feel like requiring a dexterity of 13 for that makes a lot more sense than a strength of 13.

[@galensturupcomeau1242]

@Bookworm159 the way I think about it now, is that the Heavy property is a gate for using the weapons with the highest damage, or the longest ranges, or the heaviest armor, making the strength stat more relevant, so it cannot be dumped completely, unless you are exclusively using finesse weapons/ shortbow. But I can also see what your thinking, why should a person who doesn't use ranged weapons be more skilled at using a longbow then someone who focuses on being an archer? Maybe Heavy should be thought of more as a stat skill floor for those items, vs a literal weight thing?

[@Itomon]

to be fair, real archery actually depends on a lot of Strength. I just assume that Dexterity in game has a lot more about Strength than the rules make us believe

[@galensturupcomeau1242]

@Itomon true, acrobatics IRL takes a lot of strength and body control. Look at the Olympians. To be able to move their bodies like that takes a lot of strength.

[@EpicRandomness555]

In real life, Archery requires some pretty decent strength. But in the game rules that’s not as fun. It’s also fair to say that there’s a fair bit of Dexterity involved in melee combat. That’s why Finesse is a thing. In fact, longbows have Finesse. Which means you can use Strength to shoot it. It’s just more fair the make the ability score used to fire the weapon be what Heavy requires. Does it make sense? Not necessarily. Is it fair? Yes.

[@shiro4833]

34:30 Agreed. One of my players wanted to use a shield and a two-handed warpick (bec de corbin), so I was like "If you want, the next magic item you find will be an animated shield or the next magic item store will sell one" and that was the end of that discussion. Or you want two weapon fighting, but a sword and board playstyle? Bet, your shield is now a light weapon. Use the same mechanics for a parrying dagger maybe, except it raises your AC by 1 rather than 2. Maybe you find a much more balanced partying dagger that works like a +1 dagger during your turn and +1 to AC outside of it (for a total of +2 to AC, so it's basically a shield). Maybe make it a magic item, except it isn't magical for the purpose of detect or dispell magic but rather is a unique, high quality work of craft from a renowned blacksmith. Uncommon or rare, because few of them exist, but not actually magical, just a high grade weapon. I really like asking my players their vision of what their character should be like and then homebrewing stuff to make their ideas work. I do also homebrew monsters to make them harder tho. (And so noone looks up or remembers their weaknesses. Ran a troll last week whose resistance wasn't stopped by fire or acid damage but by radiant damage. Flavored it as undead, gave it sunlight sensitivity, more hp and 17 AC to make it bulkier and attacks that deal necrotic damage)

[@LDIndustries]

I really like the new rules, terms, and interactions for Invisible, Hiding, and Invisibility. First: the flat DC 15 streamlines hiding so now the DMs and players don’t have to worry about always knowing the passive perception of each other creature on the field. Second: the term invisible is only completely synonymous with a person being translucent colloquially. If you hide or become concealed then you are no longer visible to the enemy (the rules even specifically mention line of sight) and are therefore, by definition, INVISIBLE which is the opposite of visible. Third: Even though they didn’t specifically go over it in this video, I think this actually clears up a lot of grey area surrounding what the invisibility does mechanically. Because while you’re under the invisibility spell you automatically gain the invisible condition without having to make that stealth check but you now, IN THE RULES AS WRITTEN, have to consciously worry about making noises louder than a whisper. I like it.

[@SgtBuffagor]

I remember some 4E Dungeon Masters being so frustrated with charisma-based paladins in heavy armor. "You don't have 15 strength, you can't wear plate." "No, that's the prerequisite for the Heavy Armor Proficiency feat. That makes you proficient in plate. I get proficiency in plate from my class, without the strength requirement."

[@charlesdavis9100]

Using a different "skill" to identify what you are fighting, just increase the DC for using a skill that the encounter could fit under.

[@Sethmacd0]

Just had a thought, I wonder if I could make a Monk that uses the new grappler feat to utilize the Suffocation rules within combat.

[@NUGGet-3562]

I will note that the book does mention that you can use different abilities for skills. The example Monty gave of an Intelligence or Wisdom (Persuasion) check is outlined in the book (not that specific check but an example is given of that same idea) so it is actually RAW.

[@daneroberts1996]

I’m actually really happy that tools now have real rules on which abilities and skills to use with them

[@keinlanz]

Something I think is worth calling out on the elimination of stat bonuses for races and heavy weapons - it solidifies that STR is now treated in a relative way rather than an absolute way, which I think is a welcome change as it was inconsistent and confusing before. There's no suggestion in the rules that a Gnome with 20 strength actually has the same raw power as an Orc with 20 strength, and in fact the opposite is true with the carrying capacity making it clear than a 20 str orc is actually still a lot stronger than a 20 str gnome. But a gnome fighter can still be as good as an orc fighter due to differences in style and tactics that are abstracted within the rules, i.e. being nimbler and more precise with strikes.for small racg capacity limitation

[@ic3l0s]

just had a thought about the search and study action that could be cool. if the player has a bad roll on the check instead of giving them no info tell them a true fact and a lie.

[@pyrosalsa]

Have I had way too much caffeine today or was that intro completely ELECTRIC? ⚡️

[@SonyUSA]

I think a subtle change with large implications is that all classes seem to get a "little treat" with Short Rest. They are REALLY incentivising Short Rest in an attempt to make people use it, and I think giving everyone a little crumb of class feature back is a great way to do it! I know I've never played at a table before where the group would short rest. The one time I played a Warlock, it was always a fight to get the group to stop for 10 minutes, and usually led to a party split where the other players would wander off 😢

[@Voriclexx]

I have been using Exhaustion for my death saves in my Rime of the Frostmaiden campaign for the past year. I gave the group the option of using the new Exhaustion rules and they unanimously voted yes on it, and it's been great. We don't have to keep track of what each level does. It's a brutal house rule but it's been so much more fun.

[@segafan2437]

I was always super exited about the tools rules in Xanithar's guide. These new rules sound like they're taken straight from there. I based my current character (rune knight) entirely on having a +8 to 3 types of tools. Doors are no match for me!

[@ChuckDAquatics]

The interesting question regarding hidden or invisible is how it affects players that can shapeshift into something small, such as a rodent or possibly smaller. For instance, you shift into the smallest animal possible and can attack and still be unseen depending on the style of attack.

[@muddyhobo12]

Greater invisibility reads "A creature you touch has the invisible condition until the spell ends". Just like hiding, it makes no mention of being translucent. also worth noting that restrained makes no mention of actually being restrained by something, poisoned makes no mention of actually being poisoned, etc. Its all assumed from the title of the condition. You can make the ruling that hiding doesn't make you actually invisible, but the rules say otherwise, unless greater invisibility also doesn't make you invisible.

[@genlando327plays2]

on the subject of "burning" I don't think the rule should set the amount of damage, that should scale based on what causes the effect... there's a huge difference between "burning" because you got a blast of steam that's causing you to be scalded for a certain amount of time and burning because you got hit with napalm and you're literally on fire

[@geoffreyperrin4347]

As for knowledge checks, I like the idea that the check you make is what you learn. For a dragon, history would be what feats that particular dragon has accomplished, nature is their biology, arcana is about the magic they exude on their surroundings and what magic their body parts may be used for and religion would tell you their morals and gods

[@brilobox2]

That sounds like a lot of actions to piece together the information you actually need to help fight it before it roasts you.

[@geoffreyperrin4347]

@@brilobox2 the players decide what they want to know and that determines the skill. It really just goes that the player either asks what to roll and I tell them it depends on what they want to learn or the player includes a hint in their question

[@duanebradway1627]

Another fantastic video!🎉 I am enjoying most of these changes. I agree with you 100% that dragons belong in history. The age of man was proceeded by the age of giants, and the age of giants was proceeded by the age of dragons. This sounds like history to me. I do l8ke your elemental damage conditions rules better than what was just described in the new PHB. 1D4 fire damage is lackluster at best. Keep up the good work.

[@starscream003]

This was one of the better videos explaining 6ed, which is a hybrid of 3ed and 5ed.

[@danieloneal7137]

I’d definitely allow for some overlap between the different “study” skills, depending on the circumstances.

[@ChaosWolf3]

On items in hand and all that, I’m playing Starfinder once a week and my character gets a slight benefit from those rules that feels unique and useful. Basically, I’m a Soldier with the armored storm style so my armored gauntlets are my weapons. Typically, you can’t stow a gun and draw a melee weapon in one turn. Since my weapons are my hands, there’s a meaningful reason to stay unarmed rather than using a melee weapon. At level 9, my damage doesn’t is still 1d4, but I still hit harder than anyone else consistently because of modifiers. I could reach higher max damage potential with melee weapons, but my minimum is so high unarmed that it’s worth doing. It’s a unique interaction with stowing/drawing weapons that really made that fighting style (subclass in star finder) feel good to use. It is a bit annoying to manage, but it can make some features feel meaningful because you can do something someone else can’t.

[@teambellavsteamalice]

What are your takes on houserules, any must-haves you recommend, any that are no longer needed, any that you warn against as they upset game balance? How about the changes below, how do they compare for 5.14 and 5.24? Any tips? I'm a longtime 3E player and absolutely detest allowing the wrong ability score to be used as a game mechanic, regardless of realism. That just creates SAD (Single Abilityscore Dependent) munchkins and removes variation. Everyone has a +3, 4 or eventually 5 in one stat and uses it for everything and cannot even consider picking something that doesn't use the stat. One can get extremely high stats and low dump scores that don't make any sense. So I want to houserule / overhaul and start by removing these instances, at the same time giving a bit more ability score increases (a +1 and a feat every two levels). Size should matter a lot and Str should always be added to physical damage and Dex should determine bonus to hit. Str should make it easier to hit by determining what type of weapon you can wield and how easy, giving finesse as a +2 to hit. (or you can give a -2 to hit without finesse). I use this guideline for a Str 14 character: offhand d6 1 lbs - finesse with either hand one handed d8 2 lbs - finesse as main hand versatile d10 4 lbs - finesse with two hands two handed d12 8 lbs - max wieldable size Every 2 Str everything becomes one step easier. This ties into my Size houserule of gaining +2 Str/Con and -2 Dex every doubling in weight. (i balance larger and smaller size with ability score point costs, it gets a bit complicated maybe, but big is best but a huge 😉 point sink. small gives points, minimum scores go up and maximum scores go down so you end up close to 14 +/- your size modifier.) These rules will have huge impacts on all kinds of classes, abilities, spells. Any tips on how to keep track of all changes?

[@grantsnake]

Got excited for Fairy, Rune Knight, grappler build hoping its easy to combine with the old stuff

[@SarJulem]

So does the following work for Level 5 Fighter with dual wielder feat? Start out the combat equipped with a halberd. - 1st attack: attack target and cleave adjacent target (2 attacks) - unequip Halberd - 2nd attack: equip both short sword and scimitar (can do this due to dual wielder feat) normal attack - Nick attack: sheathes both weapons - Bonus attack: unsheathe and attack with longsword

[@brilobox2]

No it doesn’t, because swapping weapons 3 times in 6 seconds goes against the universal Common Sense rule.

[@Karaxus]

You can't draw or stow weapons outside of the attack action attacks. So you won't have a weapon drawn for the BA.

[@timothyburger6715]

Goliath Rune Knight with new grappling rules is going to be such a banger

[@JugglingAddict]

I think I prefer both at the start and at the end of the creatures turn (just a turn would have been brutal depending on how many turns there are in a round), because this incentivises them to think on their turn if ending the condition is worth and whether they can affort it.

[@ATinyWaffle]

32:08 This is not correct. If you draw your bow as part of the first attack, you can't immediately unequip it after the attack. You can equip or unequip one weapon before or after an attack, not "and". If you equip before the first attack, the earliest you can unequip and still attack with a wrapon is after the second attack.

[@ryanhunter2042]

I needed to compile all the grappling rules for myself as a DM because the different pieces were all over the place. Now I get to do it again. Hopefully, the new DMG will have these rules all together.

[@geoffdewitt6845]

I guess my problem with Influence is that the DC is relatively low - DC 20 max. Someone with Expertise is going to blow right through that at Tier 2+.

[@Teschmacher]

I hate that the DC is in the PHB, really should be kept in the DMG, imo.

[@Blaidd1298]

NPCs and monsters can have up to 30 Intelligence, also, if the check is not possible you simply don't allow a check, they only roll if it is a reasonable thing, and that could be with disatvantage, also you should give NPCs who are "hard to decieve" and such high Intelligence, between 20-30.

[@geoffdewitt6845]

@@Blaidd1298 1) Sure, I guess that's a solution? Except most of the NPCs that this could be applied to are probably going to be regular folks, so in practice, it's still a DC 20 max. Which doesn't address my problem with this mechanic. 2) Is Insight still a Wisdom skill? 'Cuz if it is, why is Influence not proc'ing against Wisdom instead of Intelligence?

[@shawnmayo8210]

@@Teschmacher I like examples but I'm also a DM who changes DCs. The harder the character being worked on the more challenging the DC. DC 30 is never off the table. I've done higher for secret BBEG NPCs with them reacting like the got caught in a lie or were influenced even though they succeeded.

[@Teschmacher]

@@shawnmayo8210 my concern is that the dc's are presented to players, and the rules-lawyering types will get argumentative about something that should be entirely up to the DM

[@GeekMasterGames]

Stuff I'm gonna homebrew and observations: 1) If you hit with a grapple attack, you don't do damage, but grab the enemy. They make a Strength or Dex save (DC is your attack roll total, not a flat DC, since strikes are situational). On a failure, they're grappled by you. 2) If you attempt to hide, you become hidden if you succeed on a Stealth check opposed by any relevant creatures' Passive Perception (or, if they are alert, they can make an active Perception check). A flat DC 15 is unfair to particularly perceptive creatures. You remain hidden until you make a loud noise, are spotted, or speak louder than a whisper. Verbal components can be whispered, but opposed creatures can make a new Perception check to see if they noticed. As always, if circumstances are against you being able to hide, then you can't hide. The term "invisible" to be used for hiding is ridiculous. You're HIDDEN. Words mean things, WotC! 3) Agreed on the tools just giving advantage than trying to figure out the bonus to a tool check. If a player argues that a different skill could or should be used, then I'll allow it. 4) Finally, Small and smaller creatures can finally use Heavy weapons. FINALLY. Still sucks that there's a score restriction, but it's understandable at least. 5) I need to remind and allow players to just say "I want to try to influence this NPC" than feeling obligated to roleplay it all out. If they do roleplay it, then the DC is adjusted, but it can really help shy or new players. As always, I'm playing liberally with raising or lowering the DCs if they RP. 6) I used the term "Bloodied" already, but I'm glad it's being used now in the rules. 7) Good to have definite rules that PCs need to drink and eat and sleep or suffer exhaustion. 8) Finally, you can say that Create Bonfire actually burns things. The rules for it before were buried in the Alchemist's Fire item. Definitely something to tweak and abuse. 9) I never tracked the logistics of switching weapons. This rule will largely be ignored unless you're using unconventional weapons or doing something incredibly stupid or wacky (which is possible). It doesn't really matter to me. If you can argue that you can reliably have multiple weapons "equipped" at the same time, you can use them if you have that many attacks. If you have a weapon "stowed" then you have to spend an action to equip it. Logic. But it's good to have stuff codified, I guess. 10) People were doing this as an action anyways, but now it's in the rules and can be used with rules to have more fun with it. Overall a bonus.

[@olivert9906]

Although not a phb class, the tools/skills wording means artificers are even more potent Lvl 6 gives you tool expertise (double proficiency with the tool), so now it would be with advantage for any tool you were proficient in if you also have that skill proficiency - thieves tools and slight of hand could go +17 for the tool and then advantage on the roll - assuming max dex, add in flash of genius for a +5 so +22 with advantage on a check Pretty sweet (provided i've parsed this correctly!

[@dmnemaine]

Sleight of Hand is for pickpocketing and palming objects, not for picking locks. That would be a straight Dexterity check with proficiency if you have thieves' tools.

[@shawnmayo8210]

I caught that too. Could also be used for close-up magic to impress or annoy an NPC.

[@dmnemaine]

@@shawnmayo8210 Yes.

[@sidneyparham4002]

That might be true by the rules (at least the 2014 rules!), but I think it makes sense to extend the skill out to lockpicking. Sleight of Hand is one of the lesser-used skills in most games, so giving it an additional use isn't gamebreaking, and most characters that would be good at pickpocketing would also be good at lockpicking.

[@dmnemaine]

@@sidneyparham4002 Just because the same person is good at two things doesn't mean those two things should be covered by the same proficiency. Those who are good at pickpocketing are also usually good at being stealthy. Should Sleight of Hand also be used when someone wants to sneak by someone unnoticed? There is a game mechanic to cover picking pockets/stealing things (Sleight of Hand) and there is a game mechanic to cover picking locks (Thieves' Tools). Both of those grant proficiency for the areas that they cover. If you want to use Sleight of Hand more, then have your character start stealing more, picking pockets more, or distracting with their hands to disguise what they're actually doing with them more.

[@brilobox2]

@@sidneyparham4002 are you kidding? Sleight is used all the time. Pickpocketing, otherwise pinching stuff, slipping cards into a deck or a form into a pile, hiding the somatic components of a spell (huge), distracting people, impressing people, so many uses.

[@Wintermute909]

@ 30:00 buuuUUUrrrnIng maaaAANN! (Also, yeah I definitely do prefer your elemental burning condition, but the 5.24e is still good)

[@silvercerberus5387]

I think one of the reasons that weapons can now be drawn as an attack or put away after is so people can't abuse the weapon mastery system. "I draw my great club and attack, which means now you're prone. Then I put away my club and attack with my flail and reduce your movement speed. " Like you said, that would be exploiting the game, but we all know that there are players that will and have done that.

[@sspectre8217]

Monty staring into our souls for like 40 seconds during the influence action section

[@pretty_fly_for_a_jeskai]

I really agree with the take on tool functionality and prociciencies. While I do think that some of them are hits, and some are misses, I also think it's a wonferful system for DM's to take the liberty to build on, letting players use their tools in imaginative ways and being able to establish right away, cool! Make the skill check, DM can set the DC, and go from there. My current game offloaded Bard Song of Rest onto my fighters Cooking Utensils, and thats actually not a bad option. DC 15 wisdom and see if you cooked a tasty enough meal to add a d6 or d8 to your hit die. I'm also joining a 1-5 short campaign when the book comes out and I'm super looking forward to a Thief Rogue with Alchemists Supplies, using the acid vials and fire bombs as bonus actions. Not the strongest, but it's super cool.

[@antilivvy7373]

on the subject of multi weapon type attack LOOK AT THE INSANE SWORD HAMMER PILE MACE SWORDS! like during the late medieval period where people use to duel in full plate as they made some wild weapons like they'd make swords with a mace as the pummel, a winged spear for the tip of the sword, and the guard of the sword would be a war pick, with a greater extended handle thingy wrap and guard halfway down the blade. like we can so have the my sword, mace, spear, pick, hammer moment. but this is a specialised armoured duelling weapon, and sword was the battlefield sidearm where spears, pikes, lances, glaives, and such where the primary weapon at the time.

[@Magnushamann]

I like the weapon changing rules from deeper dungeons: CHANGING WEAPONS Once on your turn, you can change the weapons or other items that you wield (such as stowing your sling and then drawing a dagger with each hand). A weapon with the small size property can be drawn at any time during your turn.

[@garion046]

Yeah this is a bit better. It encourage load outs rather than a whole golf bag.

[@pw3829]

This was a great video. High quality analysis.

[@monkeyman3194]

I love your take on loopholes

[@joshl4751]

I think the heavy weapon change will also impact new builds focused on the true strike cantrip. I think that will be a heavy part of the new spell-sword meta.

[@ThAlEdison]

In 3.5 Monster Manual 4 the Spawn of Tiamat list multiple skills with multiple degrees of success However it wasn't really universally common. Standard system was very similar to the 2024 study action.

[@EldritchNight]

Being able to swap between weapons actually sounds interesting when it comes to weapon masteries cause you can topple with a weapon, swap to a stronger weapon, attack and put it away

[@brilobox2]

Sounds like an incorrect interpretation of the rules. Fighters get Tactical Master at level 9 which allows any weapon to use Sap, Slow or Push. Being able to swap weapons every single attack would make that feature somewhat pointless.

[@Karaxus]

@@brilobox2 no it was stated multiple time that this is intended. The tactical master frees you up to use other weapon masteries

[@brilobox2]

@@Karaxus then its a stupid rule, and I definitely won’t be allowing weapon juggling. You can swap weapons before you make your first attack roll on a turn, and thats it.

[@garion046]

It definitely opens up gameplay options, but I'm a little too much and encourages a golf bag approach rather than a PC having a couple of load outs.