What are your unpopular D&D opinions? #2

What are your unpopular D&D opinions? #2
Put your stories in the comments below they could be in our next video! If you have your own video ideas submit them to us on Reddit at r/MrRipper
Stay tuned for more awesome DnD content!
Also please check out our second channel Riptovia for feature-length stories!
/ @riptovia98
/ mrripperstream
/ mrripper
/ mrripperyt1
/ discord
Source
/ whats_your_unpopular_d...
#mrripper #dnd #dndstories
Stay tuned for more awesome DnD content!
D&D players, what way did you use a "useless" spell in a good way? #2
D&D Players, What was your best "Wait...what?!" moment?
What's the biggest mind-f**k you've seen during a DND campaign?
What's your worst loot stories?
What's the saddest death that you have ever encountered while playing D&D?
What's the funniest way you spoiled a important plot element in your campaign?
DND players, what was your funniest “rolled a 1” moment?
DMs, What is a plotline you've always wanted to run?
Ever had another PC kill your character?
DND Players, What is the coolest character you have ever played?
DND players, what was your funniest “nat 20” moment? (r/askreddit)
DND players, what’s your best Stories of Rope? (r/dndstories)
D&D Players, what's the most screwed up thing you've ever done in a game?
What's the worst TPK you've experienced?
D&D Players, what's the most screwed up thing you've ever done in a game?
DND Nope Moments #1
What’s your best Tarrasque story?
What's the funniest thing PC's latched onto?
What is the most unexpected damage you've ever done as a PC or DM?
What is the smallest way your DM has driven home how "evil" a villain is?

[@yusharider]

Being a good player is pretty easy. If you pay attention, take notes, are patient, and know what you're character does; then you're pretty good most of the time.

[@Forest9528]

I do all of this except take notes. I'm notorious in our group for only jotting down the things my character deems truly important. It's happened more then once where we've done a whole campaign from level 1 to level 10 and at the end I only have halve a page of notes. And that's a generous amount

[@yusharider]

@@Forest9528 That's perfectly fine. I'm the only guy who takes notes in one of my groups and It's not really a problem.

[@Forest9528]

@@yusharider Yeah I just personally find it arbitrary for me in particular. For example we are playing a grim hollow campaign right now and we were given all these details on what I suspect will be our final boss of the campaign and I joted down a few points but I dident copy everything we heard because it was at the time not a priority for my character. Compare that to when we were level 2 and we helped some guy who worked for the queen of fire to get back to the plane of fire I was chosen by the queen to become an agent of hers which gave me the elemental transformation. When that happened I found out as much as I possibly could from her and the ritual I had to complete and I wrote that all down diligently. When you look at these 2 situations you can clearly see which one matters more for the campaign itself and that was the beast which could destroy the whole empire like its nothing with enough time and the other was just my character gaining a higher level of power. It's just a choice I made as a player when I started playing that note taking for me isn't a really huge deal

[@Spiceodog]

But you can put more effort to help the dm. I made/ bought my characters whole home city and added dozens of interesting npcs, character specific side quests, and several larger plot hooks that could span for even more then 10 gaming sessions.

[@yusharider]

@@Spiceodog There are definitely more things than what I put down. I just wanted to make the comment short concise. Well relatively short anyway.

[@johnstarinieri7360]

Slight offshoot of the “some people shouldn’t play” point: some people REALLY shouldn’t DM. I’m fine if you don’t know all the rules or you don’t do voices for every single NPC, etc etc, but having that kind of authority can similarly bring out the worst in someone

[@WaltonGFilm]

THANK YOU!! 200% accurate!! .-. Ultimate power ultimately corrupts.

[@edamommy]

"Murderhoboes" can sometimes be a response to a lack of distinction between NPCs and enemies. This is by no means a blanket statement, and true murderhobo PCs exist to a worrying degree. However, I've seen things take a turn when a DM puts far more effort into worldbuilding than NPCs and enemies. If every NPC has the same gruff reaction to the players, same temperament, and opaque agenda, players begin to lose investment in the wellbeing of those who live in the world. It's essentially just encountering the same character, over and over again. Inevitably, the party will descend into madness because the personal stakes of maligning the NPCs are near-zero. And the DM can certainly enforce the consequences of their actions, but its often by sending more faceless drones, really just driving the point home. (ok imma close my blinds before I get shot)

[@Spiceodog]

Some dms only give exp for killing, or more exp for killing, give exp for every kill even if the kill served no actual purpose, don’t give realistic consequences for crimes, and then wonder why they have a table full of murder hobos. Of course they’re murder hobos because that’s the only way the dm allows them to progress! That’s why milestones is so much better

[@dementededge3266]

Nah, the 'npc's' that you keep interacting with is actually a single changling that has been keeping tabs on your group for her own nefarious purposes. Roll init.

[@taserrr]

In my opinion worldbuilding and NPCs are the same thing. I actually do most of my worldbuilding through NPCs. They got their reasons to act, want, flaws, relations, problems, etc. Whenever I have a place in my homebrew world you bet there's NPCs related to it.

[@buttsmcgee50]

If your players are murdering people because they’re impolite you need to TPK them to show them who’s boss

[@Saiaix]

Prebuilt adventures aren't modules to follow, they're descriptions of rooms full of magic items, monsters and traps for you to reference while frantically rebuilding NPC's... because somehow your party pissed off the good guys, redeemed the bad guys, lost half of their forces in a DC 9 pit trap and blew up most of your magical gear in order to destroy a dire rat nest.

[@tamnker8465]

Oh boy isn't the party befriending and rallying a group of goblins against the good guys, forcing the dm into a panic and revealing a major mystery to stop them from destroying a critical part of the story fun? This happened on my first ever campaign.

[@shaclown7721]

@@tamnker8465 were you the DM? Or one of the assholes screwing him over?

[@CooperAATE]

Racial ASIs were just fine. Tasha's _optional_ floating ASI is fine. Tasha's shouldn't have become the rule, and new races should have baseline ASIs like older races do.

[@ripopol]

Counterpoint: This controversy exists solely out of a problem of competing needs between Players and DM's. Players need freedom and safety to create. DM's need consistent worldbuilding and easy modifiers to attach to NPC statblocks. Tasha should certainly become the rule. It's too valuable to players, who don't know how difficult the DM will make encounters and resultingly, can't afford to risk a sub-optimal build as a single bad role can end a character. It's the only thing that avoid a system where every half-orc is a barbarian, and every high-elf a wizard because players are too worried about the unknowns that lie ahead. Without Tahsa's rule, PC's are either optimised or dead meat. And that's not touching the ludonarrative dissonance with someone playing an aging and frail half-orc wizard with a +2 in strength. but the standard spreads should remain for DM's who often need to improvise quickly when the players turn a social encounter into a combat one. ("Ok just add "Half Orc" onto the standard wizard NPC statblock",)

[@dizzydial8081]

@@ripopol I don't know about that. There are obvious patterns the different races follow that are reflected by the ability score differences. Elves are always portrayed as nimble and slender while orcs are big and bulky. Inherent body types are a thing. While it is restrictive, it makes for much better roleplay. A wizard orc will behave differently than his barnarian bretheren and probably outcast from the society because orc society values physical strength over arcane knowledge and this character has to deal with that issue. It's almost like a paradox where restrictions allow for interesting situations. Gameplay wise, your character will be weaker in that regard but that plays into the roleplaying aspect of your character. Their strengths as well as their weaknesses define them.

[@TheRavenofSin]

God yes. I personally don't like the optional rule for my game, but it's fine for others. Making it the baseline was a big mistake. It makes for more interesting characters, overcoming the shortcomings of your race to be just as good as someone else who is naturally inclined using effort (asi).

[@CooperAATE]

@@ripopol if the players feel they need to be the absolute best to make it through the game, then they need to have a talk with the DM about combat balance. He/she/they are clearly making things a bit too tough and should be capable to toning it down a bit.

[@blockhead134]

Didn't the whole removal of stat baselines happen at the same time drow got completely retconned because "we're not racist"

[@lj1653]

DM says I can't be a creature I haven't seen before my DM's face when: "hey wizard, polymorph yourself into a t-rex or use major image to create a t-rex so I can see what a t-rex looks like"

[@kaimagnus5760]

Wizard: Like this? *Make a 1:1 scale T-Rex Illusion* DM: SuprisedPikachuFace.Jpeg

[@lj1653]

@@kaimagnus5760 it can be a cute 1 foot high t rex. As long as I can see it I can become one.

[@MalWave]

Wildshape via overhead projector lol

[@fluffball6142]

Why wait for polymorph ? You can only turn into cr= 1/3 your level. So conjure animals is enough as soon as your level 5

[@blockhead134]

Perhaps because moon druids are the best tanks in the game and not even trying to hold you back would make combat a formality :)

[@draco4450]

the xp for avoiding a fight makes sense from a progression reward sense, but seems weird you get better at combat by avoiding combat

[@Aniaas1]

true but then again it's weird that you can get better at knowledge by bashing skulls in - hooray for single-track exp!

[@99sonder]

You don't just get better at punching faces in. Spellcasters' new spells bring very useful utility for communication, travel and other ways to circumvent combat. Even fighters and Barbarians occasionally gain features that have nothing to do with fighting. The adventurers get stronger by getting by another dangerous scenario because they can live another day to keep training and practicing.

[@beardalaxy]

there it is, thinking like it's a video game and that's why i prefer milestone. leveling up doesn't just make you better at combat. it's what you choose to do with your character when you level up. my character was a straight up pacifist until level 9 that only had 1 summon that would fight for him. the fact that i didn't get XP for fights i skipped or fights i cheesed with the spells i got from leveling up just because enemies were not killed kind of made me feel like my choice in character was invalidated.

[@99sonder]

@@beardalaxy Yeah, that doesn't sound fair at all. Characters, especially spellcasters, improve at so much more than just how much damage they deal when leveling up. "Oh, I guess I'm still only a +4 in my persuasion checks and my wisdom is still stuck at 17 after 30 sessions. meanwhile the Paladin that goes around mercilessly killing anyone that litters has gotten so much more persuasive and versitaile since the start"

[@claraclenky9843]

@@99sonder Right??? “Hehe I’m a dumbass barbarian and I have gotten more persuasion than the diplomatic pacifist by beating people with axes🤪” is so dumb

[@gabrielrossi853]

4:53 I once played one that was very entertaining. He was a changeling who would, every night, change into a different halfling appearance and personality, because he was cursed in such a way that even he himself didn't know what would happen. But the most entertaining thing was when the party managed to break the curse and the changeling went back to it's original form and just, started crying, because he didn't know who he was, he had lived his whole life as people he wasn't. In case anyone os wondering, the different characters he would become all believed they were a family that was cursed so that only one of them could exist at the same time.

[@zombiehunter501]

Here mine: Guns and Firearms won't ruin the weapons/armor balance of any dnd world if they are invented. In a world were Heat metal, lighting bolt and rust monsters exist didn't make heavy metal armor disappear in the worlds of dnd. if firearms are in dnd they'd just be seen a odd weapon that works like a crossbow. they're aimed and fired the same way. in fact the only change is the loading and ammo. but light and heavy crossbow also change in loading as well and not all crossbow use the same bolts. Also making firearms an exotic weapon while crossbows are a simple weapon has always baffled me. give a person who's never fired a crossbow before one, most likely won't know how to load it without something informing them how. same with early firearms. If anything a musket should treat just like a heavy crossbow. all you need is some training to know how to use it. Repeating firearms like revolvers are the exotic ones. if anyone looked into firearms of the US civil war when repeating guns started to become a thing seen on the battlefield know how drastically different they were to load and prepare from each other.

[@kemo7821]

I LOVE ADDING GUNS soley on the fact that they are probably the least dangerous tool in my world(s)

[@suracha8130]

I'd argue that a weapon that has a pretty good chance of blowing you (and maybe a friend) up if you load it wrong, if it malfunctions, if you mishandle the ammunition, etc., should probably be exotic. Besides, they're supposed to be extremely rare. We know how they work, but to people in the D&D world they'd look like magic items.

[@zombiehunter501]

@@suracha8130 A fine counterpoint, that said you could say the same of alchemist's fire which everyone can use. as well as many of the "grenades" of dnd. also some systems do have the misfire chance but it's rarely fun to play. that said. misfire and exotic as the gateway to using a firearms just annoying. as i feel it under cuts the reason firearms were adopted wide spread as they were in history. alot of power with little training compared to the years you'd need for a longbow. I think the best way to show their rarely is not need for a proficiency feat for even martial classes but the price in gold. lastly player already find ways to kill themselves and their friends with medieval tech and magic. gunpowder just add a need flavor to the mix.

[@beardalaxy]

@@suracha8130 does your world have cannons in it? if it does, then people will understand guns. guns are essentially just mini cannons, sometimes literally depending on what kind of gun you want to put in there.

[@HatiTheMoonChaser]

Metric for the win xD Only 3 countries in the world use Imperial system and also it makes it super hard for most of us to imagine sizes and distances. Like I know exactly what 3 meters, 10 meters or 50 meters looks like I have a visual. But a 100 feet (which sounded a lot when I was younger) is barely over 30 meters, like 30.5 meters or something. Silly xD

[@dodoschipper6635]

Yeah, I completely agree and personally hope that the petition to include metric into the rulebook has success. I just see no reason why not to include it, they don't have to remove the imperial system either, just put in the metric values in brackets after the imperial ones, that way we have both.

[@nihilis3288]

Then measure in squares which is 5 feet. Also times setting for DnD is the imperial measurement Era for the entirety of the world.

[@HatiTheMoonChaser]

@@nihilis3288 First of all metric system is older than imperial system, with metric starting in 1799, and imperial being standardised in 1823(before that there were dozen of version of imperial and other systems of measurement, so D&D age is not the age of Imperial system). Also telling someone something is 50 squares big is equally stupid because people won't visualise the same square and then it all goes back to being in imperial units which is completely and utterly stupid.

[@thomashayes1739]

Metric units are just as arbitrary for those who don't use metric as imperial units are for those who don't use imperial. The game was made in the US and is primarily played by Americans, so imperial is used for reference. But for the sake of inclusion, I can see them making a tweaked international version of the game that uses metric. Or even just a fan made conversion.

[@HatiTheMoonChaser]

@@thomashayes1739 What you said is literally wrong on some many levels. There is no way that 0-100 across every system makes less sense than imperial system gibberish. Like a child would understand the metric system in 10 minutes of explanation. Also most of the player base hasn't been in the USA for decades now, proportionally US would maybe be about 1/3 of the global playerbase. And Imperial system in itself is completely obsolete, the only reason US isn't making a switch is because most of the big machinery and production lines were calibrated and programmed using Imperial system and they don't want to spend money redoing and readjusting things. It's that simple.

[@ripopol]

"It's What My Character Would Do" is perfectly acceptable reasoning, even if it's detrimental to the party, good roleplay means playing your characters, and a good character has flaws that may put them in opposition to the party from time to time. The problem comes from people who haven't actually written up a character and just wrote "Chaos" on their sheet, and then rewrite their character for a lark.

[@vernonhampton5863]

the "character" statement requires context. If you're character is a warrior with a no killing policy (say Batman or Static) than, he/she/they, may let the BBEG live when at 1hp and vulnerable. Maybe your cleric hast to give half of all his earnings to charity, that's cool too. But certain situations that can be detrimental to other players fun, or autonomy are the problems.

[@tanaka173]

@@vernonhampton5863 I always point to Avengers Infinity War for a perfect What My Character Would Do. Peter Quill on Titan. He had one job and he so completely messed up by letting his emotions get the better of him. But rather than be vilified for it most of the fan base had this reaction of “yeah. He would do that.” His character had been built up to be that for so Long that if felt as no surprise. Often these moments fall flat for one of 2 reasons. 1) it’s being used as an excuse to be lolrandom. Or 2) it didn’t apply consistently. This is the subtle version. Like a Pacifist monk who kills nameless mooks all campaign to suddenly be like “I want revenge on the BBEG but murder is not right”. It comes off as cheap because the monk never had a problem massacaring armies as long as they didn’t have names.

[@itzzbowserjr]

I had a character that I was playing who was going to have a path that would eventually lead to a moment like this, but the campaign ended after 2 sessions due to out of game stuff. He had the singular goal of bringing his father back from the dead, and he’d do whatever he had to to do it. It was going to be a slow burner, but I was never going to do things just because. My friend also had a pirate character who sometimes went a little extreme, but it was always to prove a point about his bitterness towards the world. Execute a man in-front of the innocent character? It’s to show her what the real world is like and to demonstrate what happens to traitors. Asking for higher pay for jobs? Gotta get by somehow and pay his crew. I feel like that’s always the difference. It has to be for an actual reason in the character, not just the player wanting to be a dick or because they think it’d be “fun” or “funny”. Those moments where you have to say “it’s what my character would do” should really mean something. It should mean there is no meta gaming. Even if you as the player would do something else, the character in that exact moment wouldn’t.

[@mrvoltem9379]

My unpopular opinions: Clerics are op. Its ok for the DM to nerf things. Warlocks are the coolest spellcasters in flavor but are boring to play. A lot of low level magic (sleep, disguise self) are horribly OP when you think about them being this abundant in-universe and should be of a higher level.

[@adamletts885]

In my game that I was the dm the ranger was so incredibly effective, that I read there rules, and I underestimate rangers again. Rangers are a good class. My favorite class is bard, I have never tried to seduce anyone, its the rogue's job. I also think that a copper piece should be worth around a dollar, $10 for silver and $100 for gold, that way gold is valuable, and people should have more copper and silver than gold. It is annoying to change the costs of items when using this system.

[@Forest9528]

Rangers imo are actually quite a good class but the only problem with them is how niche their uses are. For example if you play a campaign where you spend all your time in a city and never once leave it then rangers aren't that good but as soon as you start traveling outwards into the wilds of the world then they become arguably the most useful class for that brief moment

[@paradichlorobenzene4132]

I agree with the coins. My campaigns rarely use gold and even when if someone has it, it's practically worthless until you get to a bank

[@helgenlane]

D&D prices be like $50k for this +1 sword and $150k for that full plate armour set, a guild hall for $500k. But $2 for that live chicken, sure.

[@paradichlorobenzene4132]

@@helgenlane that's why I increase prices so they'll typically cost at least 1 silver.

[@LocalMaple]

“It’s what my character would do” should be replaced with “why would my character do otherwise.” I have roleplayed to a strategical and personal disadvantage in combat, and gotten away with it. And I have tried to run to help a character a floor above me when I couldn’t see or hear them in danger. My DM hasn’t yet asked me “are you sure,” but my fellow allies have questioned my choices before.

[@ADLast-co5fh]

Pick things for your character that are entertaining/cool, helpful to the party or even just flat out ridiculous. Take that Alchemy Jar infusion and make 2 gallons of mayo, even if it means the Echo Knight's bag of holding suddenly explodes its contents. It's D&D! Have some damn fun.

[@Itspaydaysboys]

"Whats your unpopular D&D opinion? "Oh mines *commonly agreed upon thing*" *4.5 billion upfarts*

[@CErra310]

certified reddit moment

[@DragonKingZero]

RE: Illusions - "Though your pretty sure what you're seeing isn't real, you can't quite tell if it's illusion magic or if you _really_ should've double checked your field guide before eating those mushrooms you went foraging for."

[@sophiescott143]

Regarding getting xp for avoiding a fight: Agreed, with caveat. If the players know the fight is there and figure out a way to avoid it, they get XP. They successfully survived and bested the encounter. If, however, they avoid it some other way and never even knew it was there...no xp. They didn't best the encounter, they simply never encountered it.

[@danielrhouck]

Re: learning all the lore: I don’t know about WotC and D&D, but Paizo has deliberately left some lore questions unanswered and promised never to give an official answer, to make sure you can have campaigns without spoiling the lore

[@JudgeMagisterSnow]

Rangers are a fantastic class designed more around utility and roleplaying than anything else. Monks aren't bad at dealing damage, most people don't realize that you don't get a +1-+3 to your "Catch these hands" damage and attack rolls, and they forget that it's meant for flanking and harassment. Assassin Rogue is a roleplaying heavy archetype not designed for combat as a focus. Picking it and wanting to start or get into fights is a good way to make your party laugh at your corpse. Melee sorcerer is viable, but a heroic (melee/front line) bloodline would be pretty fantastic. Additionally, Sorcerers may not work for their magic, but acting like they're all the snooty stuck ups is pathetic when I've seen more Wizards act high and mighty. Clerics don't need God, they work just as well if they have strong conviction. They're more interesting that way, too. Edgy characters are fine. Make them sympathetic and they're even better. Make them empathetic and you've got gold. Let characters be happy. Not all Dwarves are grumpy fucks, but all Dwarves should have beards. Yes, even the toddlers. Being an Oathbreaker Paladin should not mean you yourself are inherently evil. Maybe your oath was revoked? Maybe your newfound dark powers manifested as a result of how society views you. Eldritch Blast should be a class feature, not a cantrip, and every patron should offer a different version of it with different effects. And finally: All classes with some form of magic should be able to be explained as though the power was from some kind of special bloodline or blessing. If I want to play a type of vampire without needing to roleplay with a patron, I should be able to explain my limited, but ridiculous Warlock power as my Dark Gift.

[@Spiceodog]

Name one thing a ranger can do better then a Druid can.

[@Spiceodog]

But besides that I totally agree. Some of the spells my bard uses comes from her goddess, some comes from her partially dead fiancé, and some comes from herself, maybe, well some comes from whatever bards usually do. Distinctions or origin are clear based on how I describe the spells taking form.

[@JudgeMagisterSnow]

@@Spiceodog Rangers can be better natural frontline fighters regardless of archetype, and they can immediately have better AC than Druids can because they don't have the metal armor restriction. They're also able to use more equipment and get more skill proficiencies to start with. But again, the class is more dependent on roleplaying than combat mechanics. It's why people treat it as bad. That, and how garbage Beastmaster was in the PHB.

[@Spiceodog]

@@JudgeMagisterSnow oh sorry, I meant against a moon Druid, what can a ranger do better, sure, ac I guess, but not overall survivability .

[@Spiceodog]

@@JudgeMagisterSnow and sure skills, but the druids greater amount of spells and spell slots that they can use for utility are sooooo much better then a ranger can do, regardless of the couple more spells.

[@magenstaffarts]

Small parties can honestly also be a pain in the ass. I say this as someone who has had a party of 3, and also has been in a party of 10 at one point, and have a campaign where we were a party of 5 for a while after losing multiple players (blame retail work). Yes, at times those 8-9 can be like herding cats. But it's no less "herding cats" with 3 people. If anything, the quality of the players matters just as much. I've been in a 3 person party where nothing ever got done. I've been in a 9-person party where we strategized and synergized and got work done efficiently because we were all great players who knew how to communicate and pay attention.

[@gpgordon12]

My unpopular opinion is that no one has to roll play, but if they do they should be rewarded for the extra effort. This extends pasts roll playing and goes into every aspect, if a player puts in more effort they should get rewarded. I normally use the optional inspiration rule and toss some extra money or plot hooks in for the player.

[@xelloskaczor5051]

Apparently unpopular opinion: I miss prestige classes. Apparently popular opinion (according to wotc): having trillion subclasses instead makes it totally less confusing

[@Favar1]

5e second biggest mistake is tying attrobute score increase to feats. You have to chose between being optimally good (the asi) but bland or interesting (feats) but mechanically sub par. Its not the worst thing, but it's a pointless constraint. Feats or asi should not be a choice, they should be independent.

[@WolfBoy-om6dw]

Favar1 I'm pretty sure that's a popular opinion and I agree with it

[@davidschmied667]

Feats are optimal on a lot of builds

[@WolfBoy-om6dw]

@@davidschmied667 I want just want feats for the sake of character customization witch D&D 5e needs

[@beardalaxy]

@@davidschmied667 i was gonna' say, pretty sure war caster alone trumps having your spellcasting stat maxed if you're always wielding a sword and shield.

[@claraclenky9843]

@@WolfBoy-om6dw which*

[@Forest9528]

6:05 I heavily disagree with this. Warlock is my favorite class and I really hate it when people say "wArLoCk Is A oNe TrIcK pOnY" because warlocks are not built fir combat. Yes I know crazy to think that but warlocks are mostly an out of combat and rp class so when you attack all the warlock players and say all the do is cast eldritch blast it really is annoying because the point of warlock is to not fight constantly. Also warlocks need to stop being thought about as spell casters because they aren't. A warlock is much more comparable to a fighter where eldritch blast is your sword. It is your primary damage source for when you are in combat and again it annoys me when people complain about it because you NEVER ever see people complain and go "fighters are one trick ponys because all the do is whack things with a sword" or "barbarians are one TrIcK pony because all they do is rage and then smack things with their great axe" By completely reworking the warlock like this guy has done you have fundamentally ruined the class and have completely missed the point on the class just because you don't like it when players use the best cantrip in the game. Theres my unpopular opinion

[@beardalaxy]

personally i think eldritch blast is a little boring, i like the flavor of pretty much everything else. why pick up a spell that can just push someone with some force damage when i can get ones that stabilize party members, mend objects back together, sound a funeral bell before dealing damage, the list goes on... and you can expand on your character's pact that way. this is coming from someone who has warlock in their top 3 classes, next to bard and sorcerer.

[@Forest9528]

@@beardalaxy totally agree that eldritch blast can sometimes be boring and there are spells which you can use instead for flavoring but when I play with eldritch blast I like to flavor it towards the subclass I choose. For example we are currently playing a grim homology game and I'm a parasite warlock (basically just imagine venom and you've got a fairly decent idea of the subclass) and I've flavored my eldritch blast so that instead of being a plain white beam my eldritch blast is pure black but is dotted with stars and galaxies because the parasite is from space. If I was playing the other grim hollow warlock subclass which is called the first vampire then I'd describe my eldritch blast as a beam of crimson red. I also personally think that warlocks should have eldritch blast baseline as a class feature which is slightly different according to what subclass you choose

[@ericmurotake5180]

I've always put it as that, in terms of casters, Warlocks are the party equivalent of a barbarian. They have one thing that they do REALLY WELL, with skills built around doing that one thing EVEN BETTER (Barbarians have Rage, Warlocks have Eldritch Blast), with the rest of their kit serving as extra tools.

[@TheManInBlueFlames]

Unpopular DnD Opinion: All the comments in this comment section contain opinions that *AREN'T* unpopular, except for that one about Rangers, maybe. Most here are criticising DnD's combat system as a whole or the game itself, or the writing of the characters.

[@CErra310]

You get _very_ different results if you go to that thread and sort by controversial

[@Iceblade269]

A tactical retreat is not cowardice. The amount of times my character chose to flee from an encounter that was going horribly wrong, only for the DM to hand wave it with some deus ex machina bullshit. And now, the party hates my char because apparently the stakes of life and death were never present

[@whatsagoodusername823]

Sounds like an opportunity to play like a lunatic. Your character keeps doing the logical thing and retreating from a bad situation, only for logic to go out the window as some act of divine intervention saves the party, and the party hates you for doing the smart thing. So your character gradually breaks down and starts acting recklessly because apparently logic doesn't exist anymore and the gods themselves won't let him die. Maybe take the opportunity to multiclass into an insane cleric (if you're not already one) who runs headfirst into battles he has no chance of winning because he has the power of God and anime on his side.

[@BasedWukong]

@@whatsagoodusername823 "an insane cleric that runs headfirst into battle" reminded me of Evil Dead. "I KICK ASS IN THE NAME OF THE LORD!"

[@Wolfphototech]

*The reason why people don't like pre-built adventures is because wizards of the coast makes poor adventures .* *1) Bloated books .* *2) Extremely linier .* *3) Plot holes everywhere .* *4) poor balancing .*

[@Wolfphototech]

*5) Extremely easy to break the adventure in multiple ways ( ether by failure or success ) .*

[@suracha8130]

Counterpoint: the reason people don't like premade adventures is that they don't understand that you shouldn't just mindlessly read it out to your players. You're the DM. You should fix whatever problems arise. You would do this with a homebrew game if something went down an unexpected path; why would you complain when you have to do it with a premade game? Just improvise the way you normally would, but while using the framework that the adventure represents. Some of the books are pretty ass though, I'll give you that.

[@Wolfphototech]

@@suracha8130 Only super noobs do that shit .

[@beardalaxy]

@@suracha8130 my reason for not using premade adventures is that if i'm going to be changing and fixing stuff to fit my party and myself anyway, why not just make something from scratch? i think premade books are only really good if you're in a bit of a rush to run a campaign/don't have the time to make your own, or if you're looking for some inspiration.

[@armorclasshero2103]

@@suracha8130 counterpoint: if i have to do so much work to make them viable, why would i shell out money for that half-baked content?

[@hiroshock]

I have one alignments of characters. I don't like following a single alignment so I can have fun in a game. Want to have a lawful good character fine but they to do chaotic or evil things to get shit done. Want to have a evil character cool but they have to do some nice things to keep everyone off their toes or question their morality when they find out. Don't for the sake of having mary sue characters with one alignment during a game.

[@shinrafugitives3880]

That's just part for the course with playing d&d. Doing good things as an evil character or bad things as a good character is what gives them flaws. The only creatures this wouldn't really work out for would be outsiders and dragons, since those are embodiments of their alignments.

[@hiroshock]

@@shinrafugitives3880 I understand about that when playing d&d but at the same time there are some players/dm that wouldn't change the alignment of certain characters or npcs no matter what they do or don't.

[@CooperAATE]

If you never do anything outside of your alignment, you're doing alignment wrong. It's a baseline, and just like real life, you're gonna have to make decisions where you're not sure if you're the baddie (or goodie?) or not. It causes a small - or rather large - crisis of conscience, which is nothing but good for roleplay.

[@shinrafugitives3880]

@@CooperAATE it's just like any rule. It's proven by the exception.

[@boomkruncher325zzshred5]

Humans are cool for a starting character! Characters of exotic race where their ONLY notable quirk is that they are said exotic race is boring, annoying and frustrating.

[@rommdan2716]

Humans should have racial traits too

[@lockwoan01]

My Unpopular Opinion - Custom Lineage is Over-Powered. Okay, to be honest, haven't played as Custom Lineage, nor played a game where someone took it as a character, but, Rules as Written, it's the only option that has the possibility to start off with an 18 in a stat, using Standard Array from the Beginning. Reason is, they start with a +2, and could get a +1 from a feat - there's no rule, as written, that states that the +1 form the Feat can't go on the same stat as the +2. Other races either go +2, +1, or have three +1s, and that's not factoring Tasha's Custom Origin's Rule into account (where you can move those stats around). Oh, and Custom Lineage is basically Variant Human, but with the option to pick between a Skill or Darkvision. At least with V.H., they can't get a +3 - a +2, +1 or 3 +1s sure, but that's in line with most other races. Of course, here's two other character options that can be Over-Powered - Mountain Dwarf - it has two +2s, to say nothing about Proficiency in Light and Medium armor (plus the usual Dwarf Weapon training in battleaxe, handaxe, light hammer and war hammer). Martial Wizard anyone? Half-Elf - a +2 and two +1s (those 1s could be moved around prior to Tasha's - now we can move the 2 too)! 2 skills (or an option from Elf Ancestor if one has the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide - some options are pretty good too, like the Drow and Sea Elf variants), Darkvision, and advantage on saving throws against charm spells, and magic can't put them to sleep.

[@compassman0577]

-me after hearing the one about having small parties is better:...... -also me who currently is in a campaign averaging 8-9 players a session with around 13 in total (including DM):........well sh**

[@Spartan0430]

as someone who spent around 2 years in a group of 2 (quite later on my buddy's wife joining as a third) and who has spent games with close to 10 people... it's more different than better. encounters run more smoothly just because the scale is smaller so there's less going on but at the same time we'd often get distracted by our own conversations for lengthy periods of time, not unlike the large group, but there wasn't multiple people to cut it short to get the game flowing again. however what i really enjoyed was the combat dynamics of a small intimate group. since we aren't kitted out for every situation (i was the "healer", as in i was a fighter that could give my friend temporary hit points and use a bonus action once a day to heal myself a bit) and our magic was nonexistent so we had to rely on cunning or pure dps to survive/avoid/resolve the multitude of dangerous encounters.

[@adamxei9073]

Death effects and critical injuries should be in the base game. There is no point in making something intimidatingly large or insanely dangerous in design when mechanically it makes no difference.

[@KumiChan2004]

Roleplaying is a give an take. You need to give your own time and energy on both sides of DM'ing and playing, so that people can play off each other a bit.

[@an8strengthkobold360]

Prebuilt campaigns tend to suck if you don't heavily modify them.

[@stankdelicious6479]

Your characters alignment doesn’t dictate their actions….Your characters actions dictate their alignment.

[@serpentinewolf7085]

Yes and no. Like if you make a character and say this is their alignment and immediately fuck up, you just fucked up. However, it can change slowly. Lots of people just don’t flesh out characters.

[@mechengr1731]

Idk if unpopular, but just a complaint: they chose to make new dragon sub-classes in the new book about Dragons but they didn't update the Draconic Sorcerer sub class....

[@kemo7821]

Turned off night vision and made it a spell only thing. Our gameplay has increased in quality dramatically

[@jamesmekdeci5570]

Sorcerers can be an amazing class if played well whether it be with multiclassing or going with feats and subclasses. I'm playing one in a very homebrewed version of curse of strahd and my god I absolutely love playing him in and out of combat

[@cheezeofages]

I think the pre-built campaigns are mostly a waste of money. They just throw in a tutorial to get you to 3 (sometimes 5) that has next to nothing to do with the rest of the story (and sometimes has situations that can easily trick a party into wiping) and then aren't usually designed to go all the way to 20. Often resulting in what amounts a 10 level game (not including the tutorial you'll want to skip so you don't have to play 1-2 through an irrelevant prologue) where sub 15th level characters are thwarting lords of hell and characters are sub 10 casually walking around the Nine Hells.

[@graveyardshift2100]

In 5e, not using feats, multiclassing, or magic items makes the game better. Character abilities become much more important, martial classes can stand out better as the powerful warriors they are supposed to be. Casters both must make their spells count, and are so much more dramatic when they do use higher level spells because they don't have a magic bag full of magic scrolls that they use to avoid using their magic spells. And finally, higher level games would actually be more doable because of the characters' significantly lower power compared to a game that allows feats, multiclassing, and magic items.

[@saninpain]

So half of a game? And your incremental advances become irrelevant, this doesn't seem structurally sound for long play.

[@JudgeMagisterSnow]

I fully believe that feats should be something a character trains for. Taking them away completely is a bad idea, and getting characters super strong is cool and all, but...having more interesting skills and other cool things to do can oftentimes be more fun to that player than optimization.

[@graveyardshift2100]

@@saninpain half of the game would require these things to actually be core mechanics. They are not. Feats and multiclassing are optional rules to begin with, and magic items are not even in the phb and are at dm discretion. I'm not suggesting playing with "half" the game. I'm suggesting that playing with only the core game would be more fun.

[@saninpain]

@@graveyardshift2100 Yeah no. It's in the PHB. And the DMs guide. It's RAW and RAI. Can't tell you that more. If you don't want feats don't play 5e. Classes are balanced to be used with feats not for a feat agnostic setting. Try playing 3.5 instead.

[@graveyardshift2100]

@@saninpain READ the actual rules about feats. It flat out says in the phb that feats are an optional rule, as in not a core mechanical part of the game. Same goes for multiclassing. If something is an optional rule, regardless of what book it's in, then it isn't a core mechanic.

[@CaptRedJack]

druids cannot use bows (a weapon made primarily of wood) but can use scimitars (a weapon made primarily of metal)

[@parade6271]

Druids can't wear metal but can use it

[@CaptRedJack]

@@parade6271 but can't use wood apparently

[@professortrog7742]

About the gametable: just pre-corona i found that there usually where 4 or 5 laptops on the table around the optional map, and there was a regular struggle to keep the pixyjuice flowing and not trip over the wires. So i made a wooden (Wenge, a very dark hardwood) insert for the GMs extendable table that has several outlets on the bottom side and one long powercable. It made for a nice birthday present. Hey Ralf, you are most welcome 😁

[@Antimonium]

D&D is already converted into metric in foreign editions, it's just slightly rounded: one kilogram is half a pound and each square is 1.5 meters

[@beardalaxy]

playing with each square being 1.5 meters i feel like is harder to deal with than each square just being 5 feet though. you can count 5, 10, 15, 20, etc. instead of 1.5, 3, 4.5, 6, 7.5, 9, etc. it's much cleaner. i'd rather round it down to 1 meter which would be less realistic but a whole lot easier than even 5ft would be.

[@Antimonium]

@@beardalaxy what I usually do is I count the squares and then multiply by 1.5, it is a little harder but trust me after a while you get accustomed and you don't even notice

[@arielvillanueva1127]

METRIC DND PLEASE! No one in this Century mesures with their feet.

[@archellothewolf2083]

Unpopular Opinion: There's nothing inherently wrong with Multi-classing. It's come up with at least 1 person at every table I've played at. Just because some players like to munchkin doesn't mean I am. I just wanna play a Magic Knight and am not a huge fan of the Eldritch Knight subclass.

[@JudgeMagisterSnow]

I recommend a Dwarven Sorcerer. Get armor proficiencies from your race, abuse Green Flame Blade and Quickened Spell. If they want you to munchkin, do it in a way that'll steal kills from them. I'm running a variant human version of this currently, and I'm out-pacing the Oath of Vengeance Paladin with a Devotee's Censer while using a cane.

[@dizzydial8081]

Unpopular opinions are just popular opinions people didn't realize they had until they are told the opinion and think about it. My unpopular opinion: D&D should have gatekeeping. There's nothing worse than someone who gets into the hobby and tries to implement changes to core mechanics for whatever real world political or social reason.

[@clivevii2231]

I love running Dungeons and Dragons, its so much fun. I hate running dungeons however, they are always so boring to slog through and i dont know how to make them interesting, this is at worst with dungeons from prewritten campaign books. I really like creating the dungeons, but then running them is Just a pain

[@DaBandOFunnies]

I totally agree that dungeons can be just mindless combat, but I actually really like them once you spice it up. I think one of the best ways to do this is to give each dungeon one special mechanic, for instance the dungeon could be full of machines operated by a key which your group only has one of. Immediately it could turn from a dungeon to a life or death game of hot potatoe.

[@ericmurotake5180]

One thought is to take the prewritten dungeon and then add flavor. Try and challenge yourself to evoke a visceral response from your players. Maybe in, say, a dungeon populated by undead, describe how there's certain corpses with large chunks torn away by the ravenous undead servants, but have them also stumble upon a room with other bodies, less damaged, but with horrific implements festooning the bodies, in some twisted "rebirthing" ritual to bring back the "worthy" as undead. Or have a human dungeon where they find the mutilated bodies of non-human races left in crude torture devices by a fanatical group seeking to "purify" the land. Another idea is to take dungeons and subvert the expectations and think "how can this be worse". Maybe have, say, what the heroes think is a bandit cave, starts out looking that way, only... The bandits seem to few in number and scared out of their wits. The party goes in further, and finds out that these poor souls dug their way into something HORRIFYING. An eldritch nightmare, or some accident ruin still guarded.

[@KamiRecca]

About the Copper and Silver, there is a realy easy fix for that: The Silver Standard. So basicly 1 Silver ingame is equal to 1 Gold in the Books. It takes 100 copper to make a Silver, and 100 Silver to make a Gold. So a Gold coin in game equals 100 Gold Coins in the books. Tadaa.

[@DRAGONalpha117]

italian dm here, you do NOT want dnd converted into metric! 5 feet square = 1.5m, in diagonals you alternate 1.5m and 3m so if you don't have straight 90° or 45° angled lines it's HELL ------------ = 1.5+1.5+1.5+1.5... / / =1.5+3+1.5+3+1.5.... / / / = 1.5+3?+1.5?+1.5?+3?+1.5?+3?+1.5? / /

[@boomkruncher325zzshred5]

Total Party Wipes are not the only ways to punish rash/overconfident players. I’m playing an Inupiat (“Eskimo”) human ranger (he went south to send trade north to his tribe), whom just got their arm chomped off by a Roper in our last session. Our weapons were just barely not good enough to pierce it, and our Sorceror drained all their firepower trying to KILL the darned thing, so the DM made an INCREDIBLE consequence instead of a total party wipe (the thing ran off after eating my arm). NOW I get some AWESOME RP, and my character has to find a way to still be an archer (HIS WEAPON SPECIALTY) with only one arm! I CAN’T WAIT AAAAAAAAA

[@yourdadsotherfamily3530]

The table thing just seems so weird to me like unless it’s reallllllllly fucking with your ocd or flow of the game then yea but if you don’t wanna use if for cup holding you could put snacks in there ; ) start thinking smarter not harder kidz’

[@joshuawiener5003]

But I want to think harder.

[@ilonafleischer924]

Hexagonal grids should be more popular. Square grids make distance wonky because of diagonal movement.

[@Favar1]

5es third worst mistake is short rests. Some classes heavily rely on them to be effective, but story wissit makes little to no sense to suddenly casually rest in the middle of a dungeon, next to a barred door with the bbeg on the other side. It's difficult to justify that action in character, and rp wise convince the other classes that rely on a long rest to take a break, making the warlock fight with no spell slots.

[@JudgeMagisterSnow]

It does make sense. Groups of adventurers aren't gods. Everyone needs to take a breather once in awhile, and taking stock of who's hurt and bandaging wounds makes sense. Especially since fighting can be exhausting. Short rests are less of a problem than you believe.

[@renkol123]

@@JudgeMagisterSnow My guess is people's image and use of them is an issue. Taking an hour to chill right outside the dragon's lair after smashing your way through: dumb and the dragon is gonna try to bbq you. Taking a break halfway through after setting some basic defenses to curb anyone trying to come for you? Makes sense.

[@TenNoOkami]

Unpopular opinion: DMPCs are fun to run and can be an asset to your game AND beloved by your players.

[@seabass819]

As a felt card table owner, I can say (in my case) the felt table is so I can play in the living room vs the dinning room, no leg cramps from sitting prolonged in uncomfortable chairs.

[@Eothr]

4th Edition was a solid game that suffered from corporate shenanigans more than actual design flaws.

[@fredreichkarr1854]

Playing a transmog is okay. If you want to play something like a *insert playable race here* for the stat block but for RP be a *insert playable race here* go for it. It’s fun and creative. Having different stats for the same general type of enemies is good. Not all bandits are weak. Some could be highly trained mercenaries, or badly trained hooligans. Makes more sense. Depending on the party, not using the material components element can be better than using it. For some parties it makes the game more fun where other it may not be the case. Play to your players interest. At the end of the day, as a dm you should tinker the game to make the players happy, within reason. If you can get it done, then get it done.

[@bretsheeley4034]

My unpopular opinions: 1. I like XP over milestone since it allows me to reward bonus XP for when a player goes above and beyond. It rarely does much to unbalance the party. At worst, one or two PCs levels up a single session ahead of others. Big whoop. Seeing their expressions when an extra bonus is given out is more than worth it. 2. I prefer the complexity of the crunch of PF1E over 5e. I love the high amount of customization, and it just feels wrong to me to not be able to distribute my own skill points. "My warrior just spend a session performing on stage while fighting real monsters. Yeah, I'm giving him a few points in Perform (Sing)." Everything else just makes the classes too cookie-cutter for me. (That said, I do think 5e is a great system to on-board new players; but I see Pathfinder 1e as the pro-tier level of the game.... I haven't played PF2e yet though.) 3. I think there should be a new coin added that's above platinum (palladium maybe?), that or change the factor between each coin step from 10 to 100. 4. Conflict between PCs can make a game fantastic. A perfectly happy adventuring group can be dull. (However, conflict between Players is a big NO.) 5. GMs lose their right to complain about their group being "murder-hobos" after the second time, back-to-back, the primary friendly NPC turns against the party. If you don't want the group to simply go around killing everybody, then you need to keep things in a situation where that isn't their apparent best path to success.

[@jonathancrosby1583]

Swimming should be a check but noooooo I'm just an asshole for asking the wizard in chainmail(make since in context no good tldr) to make an athletics check to not drown after falling off a cliff like ffs put on chain and try to swim I'll wait

[@ericfelipe4198]

Rogues are absolutely the worst class in the entire game and any party without one is profiting

[@dendere3894]

What did your rogue steal from you /j

[@ericfelipe4198]

@@dendere3894 Nothing, they just don't add anything to the game and all of them just do the same things, Hide, sneak attack, repeat the process

[@xMaugrex]

Plotting out your characters' classes and levels in advance does NOT mean you're a powergamer. It's fun to take a paladin with levels in rogue, and work backwards to make a character whose backstory makes your strange combination make sense, and it doesn't have to mean you're just doing it because it's a strong combination. Related unpopular opinion: Wanting to create a strong multiclass combo doesn't mean you're a powergamer, or a murderhobo, or whatever. The game just DOES get less fun, whether you want to admit it or not, if you play a character you either don't enjoy, rolled low for, or built poorly (not always; a meme character with intentionally bad stats or classes can be fun too for laughs or roleplay).

[@postapocalypticnewsradio]

PANR has tuned in.

[@joedan5366]

Coutl patron or lamia patron

[@postapocalypticnewsradio]

@@joedan5366 coutl!

[@1Ring42]

"Its what my character would do" is only a problem if you actually say that phrase. Ie if your characters actions are going to disrupt/go against the party you need to have a valid in game reason. Some examples: I was playing a bard who was an Indy rock star from "our world" and got randomly pulled into borovia. We went to the chapel in the village of borovia and saw the priest praying and heard cries of help from the basement. I asked the GM how catholic did this priest look... and was luckily restrained by the rest of the party. 2. We were playing pathfinder in magical colonial America and the party was basically "we hate the Spanish" central. Our kobold ranger went farther than the rest of us with it because it was personal. But by the time it caused any disruption it was well established how deeply he hated the Spanish and it led to a good RP scene where we talked him into biding his time.

[@mypizza4715]

I had an “it’s what my character would do” moment but I had sound reason behind it and people looked at me like I was the crazy one

[@fabiovert]

Fun fact 7:50 D&D was converted to metric system when they translated it to Portuguese (PT-BR), since imperial system is a complete nonsense for us Brazilians (and probably the rest of the world)

[@carpedm9846]

Liches are laughably weak for cr21. They are more like cr15-17. Horror games dont work in dnd, because the entire game premise relies on "townsfolk are scared of Monster, go kill Monster". No matter how scary you narrate a monster, its just something else you can kill.

[@N3kr0n15]

Gaming tables are for gaming. Dinner tables are for dinner. You can play games on a dinner table. Gaming tables are tacky for fancy dinners. If you can only have one table and can't figure out which to get, then you probably aren't smart enough to do math anyway.

[@krystopherguadalupe1760]

“Lonewolf“ or “strong and silent“ type characters don’t deserve to be part of the party. Unless there is something very specifically planned for this to synergize with the dynamic of your party why create A character that doesn’t I think they need people

[@TheManInBlueFlames]

You can't have characters that are all chatty or all do all the work. That wouldn't make sense. There needs to be at least one who talks less.

[@krystopherguadalupe1760]

@@TheManInBlueFlames maybe, but that’s not what I mean. There’s always going to be that one character that strives in social interactions (typically the one with the highest charisma), but that’s not an excuse for you to be mute

[@TheGraveKnight]

Well tbf the strong and silent type could just be a stoic person. As for the lone wolf, that can be worked around if your plan is to have them slowly open up and get used to teamwork or having them acknowledge that while being a lone wolf socially can work, in combat a level of cooperation is needed.

[@shadexvii3975]

I agree about the weapon one. Like…glaives and Halberds are near identical in DnD

[@CaptainFoofoo64]

5TH Edition has become more about being touchy/freely and less heroic adventuring.

[@CaptainFoofoo64]

@Mr Smith But... Mat Mercer was entertaining in the Mythica movies.

[@roaringlaughter3812]

Homebrew is better then vanilla dnd

[@The_AuraMaster]

Because the role-playing thing was brought up several times: Personally, I like to act as the character. So for example, instead of saying "Zeph tells him he's had enough of this" I'll just say "I've had enough of this!" And tell the DM what I do Because I think it's fun. I still understand it's a game, but it's fun and I feel like it should be more common because it's an RPG, which is literally short for Role-Playing-Game. Just don't be a "That Guy" about it. The cleric of the party speaks saying "Rampion tells him he's just along for the ride" instead of acting as the character, and if he prefers that, that's fine, but I don't think it'd hurt to do what I do given the right kind of DM.

[@starmada105]

Wizards are a bad class because they cut in on almost every other classes niche in some way besides maybe clerics and barbarians. Druids? Polymorph. Frontline fighters? Bladesong. Nearly every casting class (Sorcerer, Warlock, etc) shares at least part of its spell list with wizards and with feats that can let you take spells from other classes spell lists it’s a moot point. They regain some slots on a short rest so they undercut warlocks. They get better spells than the sorcerer, and even though metamagic is a decent ability wizards can just, take two sorcerer levels without losing any slots.

[@trinstonmichaels7062]

Trinston was here ..

[@postapocalypticnewsradio]

PANR liked that.

[@danki9989]

i agree that the american publication of dnd shouldnt be converted to metric. how ever, if the books are produced to be sold in a country that has metric instead of impirial it should be converted to metric for those countries.

[@nekotyrant1629]

Basic Human is just as fun to play as any other race. Just don't give them a basic personality. And you shouldn't make pure Joke or pure Serious characters.

[@jonathanwilson4791]

May seem hard to understand buuuuut. Metric is easy to learn and would suit DnD well.

[@adamwelch4336]

Some times people get to paraniod and think evey npc is out to get them ! The worst thing about that is to many dms go to heavy on the subterfuge! And players want to torture a halfing child because he said something mean! That's how murderhobos are made! That's why (the mighty nien freaked out on a chair! You know which chair !)

[@tazman2253]

I have been in arguments that have gotten very heated about the 5E feats and how broken they are.

[@foxperson8943]

Drow ranger here, I don't see why so many people hate rangers

[@arthurpprado]

Metric just makes more sense. It scales better, has more intuitive names and converting from one unit to the next is usually a multiplication or division by 10

[@matthewlabodin3981]

The Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul Sorcerer subclasses aren't that great. Everyone only loves them because of the spell list. Without those free spells, they're only "Okay" at best. On top of that, the fact that they don't even have to stick with that spell list and can swap them out with some very loose restrictions makes this even more apparent. No other class has the ability to swap out subclass spells. Sorcerers shouldn't get special treatment because they've been getting shafted for so long. Just give spell lists to the rest of the subclasses instead.

[@bombomos]

Weed doesn't mix well with DnD. From my own experiences. At the basic level most people who have been high just sit on their phone or wonder off. At the worst we had a dude keep rolling when the entire party told him to stop rolling. We were trying to get a follow party member out of a snare trap that every round was hurting him. He had barely any HP left. I roll to cut the snare with my claws. It works and I have one more part of the snare to cut to set him free. High boy comes over and rolls to swing at the snare with his great sword. Nat 1. He hits the dude and cuts off one of his death saving throws since nat 1. Everybody tells him to stop rolling. To let me handle it since I have the highest chance to hit and im not swinging a fucking sword at full force. As I roll he rolls as well another Nat 1. High dude laughs cuz he finds it funny he got another Nat 1. Dude in the snare dies. We are too low level to revive. Snare dude just got married to another PC and he had cursed wedding rings so his wife dies as well. In one roll high dude killed off two party members. That's the day I stopped playing with that group. With that dude. Fuck him.

[@afasdfasafd314]

i believe in metric system superiority!

[@lochthefox6397]

You aren't alone.

[@XMaster340]

That's not an unpopular opinion. That's a fact!

[@CErra310]

The entire rest of the world does

[@kohutcug6376]

My unpopular opinions: Critical role was only fun for few eposedes and their fandom is worst Players and dms i have ever seen.

[@DiploRaptor]

The game should 100% be made into metric

[@sods505]

tbh I really agree with the first couple of opinions. Prebuilt campagns suck

[@firstnamelastname7244]

I think complaining that the warlock is a one-trick pony for eldritch blast is like complaining that the fighter is a one-trick pony for using a melee weapon. It's their basic attack.

[@danielstocks9088]

You can pick and choose as a DM on how much HP npcs have and AR as well

[@SirusEinzla]

Unpopular opinion: If you are having fun at/in your game, enjoying the time with friends as you all play, through all the laughs and hard times, then you are having the critical role experience already.

[@amendersc1650]

I couldn’t agree more with the player-should-know-there-abilities one. I am a wizard, and not only I know what every single spell I know does, I also have at least one combo move (alone or with others) for most of them

[@lorenzocassaro3054]

Unpopular opinion (at least for my DM): I personally think speech dice rolls are a necessary thing and when done well they don't hinder roleplaying at all

[@gabrielcruz2510]

Ppl unpopular opinions be like "I think DnD good" So listen here. DnD 5e is fine and dandy for newcomers, but it's watered down by its movie/videogame-ish "rule of the cool" and overpowered design, that renders it inhospitable to a plethora of storytelling facets. And diehard fans should be ashamed

[@Alcadeias90]

Wtf?! Yes! Metric, Bwheeh is the imperial system.

[@drackestalentorgen166]

Yeah I agree with the metric one, or atlest have metric standards next to each other as examples....most of the planet dont use imperial and I had to learn some metric just for the game, and when visualizing or designing new dungeons its gets confusing for either Me and my players sometimes

[@shinrafugitives3880]

I think 1e was best for roleplay. The only roll you needed to determine how your roleplay resulted was with a 2d6 plus your charisma mod. That way, you could really fine tune what you really wanted to do without needing a mechanic for it. Want to antagonize or insult someone? Roll reaction and subtract your charisma mod to see how pissed off you make the npc. Wanna seduce? Reaction roll. That one mechanic makes so much more possible.

[@ashleyfernandes3094]

i dont want to rant but there is many "hot takes" about D&D that i would share but ill try not to get to spicy and keep it simple. few to no games should start with the PC at LV1 and the starting LV can and should be different for each PC based on there lore. how strong they should be. (within reason) and they should be room or reason to have this pushed farther for good PCs that have a want to server a role in the campaign. example if u want to have hard fights but dont want to risk a TPK. have a over LV PC that can only use there better tools if others need it and has lore as to y they dont do so sooner like they use to work for the BBEG and dont want the party to hate them so they just try and blend in. there are loads of ways to keep this fair feeling too. such as the higher LV PC(s) cant LV up till the lowest LV PC catches up or they have different mild stones for LV ups. that way ppl can all have points of power and it can be more lore and role play tools to get into.

[@tanaka173]

I’d say this is a problem when you don’t know your group. With that bunch of people you’ve played with 20 years? Awesome. The unknown masses of Roll20? Big likelihood of problems coming up.

[@ashleyfernandes3094]

@@tanaka173 so do u think the things should start at LV 1? it was short but also in my comment. if u dont mind me asking how do u feel about that?

[@tanaka173]

@@ashleyfernandes3094 I honestly think (specifically D&D) no. I honestly feel like D&D before level one was created as training wheels. This is what your character can do and will do but we will give you more subclass abilities and such after you’ve got a chance to really know how the core class works. For a newbie group or for someone trying a tricky class for the first time ever level 1 is the best way to introduce the ideas behind it. But most builds really only work out from level 3

[@tanaka173]

@@ashleyfernandes3094 also the fact that most builds take till level 3 to get properly started. It’s easier to make a level 3 backstory to explain how you got those abilities as opposed to in game over 2 sessions. It just feels like unless you’re making an absolute new blood without any experiences you need to start minimum level 3

[@tanaka173]

@@ashleyfernandes3094 So yes I agree 100% start with level 3 unless its newbies.

[@soulweaver64]

Even my european friends prefer our TTRPGs in Imperial. If the game was built around metric, that's great! Shadowrun is metric, and nobody hates that. But if you take a game that's all built around imperial and convert it to metric, you basically have to rebalance the game to fit, and everyone has to relearn the game from scratch.

[@viniciusmelo2070]

it's practically the same thing but with different numbers. 60ft becomes 18 meters, but the amount of "squares" you can walk is the same. Me and My friends play with a translated verison of the books with the metric system, works the same way but it's easier for us since the Metric System is what our country uses.

[@JacobL228]

0:33 No, you're right. Checks and saves mean something, and a good player doesn't metagame. To this day, my character still believes that his friend escaped the cave-in that trapped, if not killed him by just going through the back door... of a cave... that we had all thoroughly searched beforehand, because he failed his insight check. 1:13 This is true. There isn't much reason for races like half-orcs to have darkvision, but they do. Humans are basically the only mainstream race that doesn't have built-in darkvision. 5:51 But if you did that, you'd have to take away its ability to regain all expended spell slots on a short rest to balance it out, otherwise, it's too OP. 6:13 That's fair; the DM is there to have fun, too, so you can't expect them to do all the work.

[@dandyboio2865]

1. rangers are really good if you know how to use them and sound pretty fun 2. if you think monks or warlocks are under powered you clearly haven't played one or used them correctly 3. not all rogues have to be sneaky to get off sneak attack 4. kobolds are the best change my mind also i want to befriend them all