I swear dude you are single handedly converting me to Pathfinder 2e

A very important point that comes with the fixing of the "between 6 and 8 encounters per day" problem : you can finally build dungeons without a monster in every room. And it will be perfectly fine ! Because you don't have to exhaust the ressources of your players and because hazards and skill checks give huge amounts of xp (or because you use millestones, that I recommand), you perfectly can have a cave full of bandits with only 2 or 3 combats : the guards at the entrance, some random walkabout if the party is not sneaking successfully, and the boss + his minions. You can fill all the other "rooms" or places with traps, challenges, creativity, social skills, whatever you want. No need to beat the 8 rooms with the 8 variations of a small group of bandits. Very powerful storytelling tool.

As a 5e GM, the more I learn about Pathfinder 2e and engage with these comparisons, the more validated I feel in my struggles. I'm running an epic campaign and the players are currently level 16. Balancing encounters is a complete crapshoot. I can throw things at them that according to the system is probably Deadly x4, and they breeze through it. It's become really stressful and work-intensive. I'm really looking forward to finishing the campaign and switching to PF2.

I haven't even played my first real game of P2 yet, and I can already see that the 3 Action system is absolutely the way D&D should go.

I personally think the rules are a + to a narrative game. The thing is I know how to roleplay a character and I know how to tell a story. I want the game system to be able to handle the rest of the stuff. Pf2es strong rules are good at handling that stuff and also lets me cutomize without having to worry about being optimal or whatever.

I have to be honest that I saw PF2 initially being what this person on reddit thought: I thought PF2 was just taking what made 5E good and what made 3.x stuff good and put it together! After actually going out and learning about it I found it to be VERY, VERY different than either however! Edit: In the best of ways, at least in my opinion! It has become my go-to fantasy system over the last couple of years, the time in which I have really gotten to learn about the system.

Man I just saw Jason Bulmahn's new video (about his Pathfinder Hack, Hopefinder) and his 4 Pillars of Pathfinder 2e Core Game Engine, and their fine tuning of math to make it story driven and customizable is downright inspiring. He and his team were so incredibly passionate about creating an game engine that is iconic and future-proof that they absolutely hit it out of the park. Props to him and paizo team.

This made me realize that silvery barbs is a more powerful version of hero points, no wonder that spell feels busted! Great breakdown of the design philosophies and differences!

CORRECTIONS/ERRATA: -At 10:10, there are some free actions that don't have a trigger like Release (releasing an object). A number of others don't have triggers per se, but they need to be done immediately before doing something else (like a wizard draining their Arcane Bond to fuel their upcoming spell). -At 12:05, there actually is ONE more type that comes up SOMETIMES in battle, the item bonus from an alchemical item or some other effects -If you dislike tracking conditions and their effects, digital tools like Pathbuilder, Wanderer's Guide, and VTTs let you apply them automatically. -At 20:52, Guidance and Bless don't stack because they aid DIFFERENT kinds of checks: Guidance boosts ability checks, whereas Bless aids only attack rolls and saving throws. -At 39:50, one of the Big Six was a statboosting item to increase your main ability score. (Belt of Giant Strength, Headband of Alluring Charisma, etc.) Shields, while a SEVENTH big item for some characters, was optional. -At 1:04:12, I had planned to but forgotten to give credit to 4e for defining simple, streamlined uses for skills in combat.

"...on this satisfying razor's edge, where the party's tactical decisions matter in determining whether they win." That's something I've really found myself striving for (often unsuccessfully) in my past D&D 5e games and something that comes through in all your group play videos and your amazing 20th level Ancient Red Dragon boss encounter video. Thanks for making such amazing content for us Pathfinder newbs! m(_ _)m

Please make the rogue cleric fighter teamwork scenario a short, I need to share it with all my PF2e players!

This is probably, in my opinion, the best PF2e comparison video made. Excellent dive into the reasoning behind, and execution of, the things that make the system work well. This video definitely will help me articulate why I prefer PF2e more succinctly and accurately. Awesome work! You've been on a roll lately, I find that I will drop what I'm doing to catch your latest videos, and they don't disappoint. Thanks for the great videos, I'm glad to have an advocate for this game like you!

Excellent video, Ronald! The only point I would add is that because of the way the "bounded escalator" allows the encounter system to work, it alleviates the issue of action disparity between the two sides of combat. If a party of 4 PCs is fighting a single creature that's +4 levels higher than them, that's 12 actions per round versus 3 actions per round. But because of how the numbers are designed, those 3 actions from the boss monster will be MUCH more impactful (likely critically succeeding) than the 12 actions from the party. I'm looking forward to the rest of the series!

Ronald, what an awesome video! Thank you, once again, for your amazing work. And, should I say, the "graphics" and images used in the presentation: GORGEOUS! Glad to be here and support you as much as I can. Looking forward to return to your Patreon. Hope you are fine! Thx again

No conditions are more consistent that Undetected and Hidden, your Allies could Point Out (>Action) the position, and the creature is now hidden and your Allies know which square the creature is, which is in fact the only difference between both conditions. Your Allies could also grapple the creature and you will be sure of which square the creature is, but it is still Undetected for you, but is technically Hidden in reality. I really like the consistency of conditions of 2e.

Only criticism I have is that the Big 6 includes stat-boosting gear, such as a Belt of Giant Strength, not a shield. In fact, oftentimes getting your stat-boosting gear is your top gearing priority. Great video!

Thanks. This video was amazing. I haven't played D&D in a few years, but my oldest son was asking to play so I had pulled out my 5E books and started preparing for that. I was defaulting to 5E as I already had physical books, and knew the system and my prep time is pretty limited, but various things especially on the DM side were really starting to grate on me in preparation. When the whole OGL mess went down I bought the Humble Bundle for PF2 as a statement (and hey, can never have enough game materials), but I had not really looked into it in detail. I was worried that it would hew too close to 3.5/PF1, and the various issues it had. I had not played a lot of PF1, but I was largely underwhelmed by how little it had fixed from 3.5 at the times I looked. This video was very helpful in seeing how PF2 actually has addressed a number of the things I was concerned about from 3.5/PF1 and 5E. Enough so that I am going to commit to at least digging in and giving the core rules a thorough reading to see if it would be a better choice for us. This video has made me a lot more confident that if I do spend the time to learn PF2, I can at least trust that it will do something to address those ten issues that were all weighing on me to some degree while planning to play 5E again.

It's not going to be for everyone, but I really love this level of depth. Thanks for all of the work putting this together.

I still love 1st edition pathfinder, but I just ran the beginner box for 2e for some friends and I did find it really, really nice to not feel like I have to keep an entire reality simulation running in my head. Next step is to jump from tricycling to a biathlon by converting the Strange Aeons AP for 2nd edition 😅

Thank you so much for this video. I love that you are teaching some of the structure/theory behind the rules, which is really helping me jump start the intuition needed to run a ttrpg!

The most complicated parts for me are: the statuses/conditions their effects and which stack and which don't; the hidden/concealed/etc and the ins & outs of that

5:00 - don't forget that 5e is split into DMG and PHB whereas PF1/2 both use a combined CRB. That makes the CRB seem kinda hefty, until you realize it's two books in one.

This was EXTREMELY helpful in crafting my pitch to my players to try Pathfinder. I also stopped playing D&D just as 3.0 was coming out and didn't get back in until 5e and was super interesting overview that helped me understand the landscape of design evolution.

I love this channel more than most of my family. Thank you for your dedication and love of the game!

This was a very useful overview for someone who has played multiple editions of D&D, and now is looking at the PF2 starter box and scratching their head. Keep it up!

Thank you for making these. Very information rich and much appreciated!

Another great video Ronald. Thanks for putting in the time and effort to make these videos. As a newb to pf2 I really appreciate it.

Thank you for the time and attention you've put (and continue to put) into this. It's appreciated for sure! :D

I have been trying to get my group to try pf2 for a while and this will help me immensely. Great vid!

I love this video, I have played through all editions of both D&D and Pathfinder and I could not agree more with you. Great explanation, clear and fair. Thanks! Keep recording good videos.

Your explanations were really helpful in processing both systems, particularly advantage/disadvantage and i feel less compulsion to forcefully replicate the dynamic now that i understand the background. Thank you!

Nice video Ronald! I think the more visual format of this video helped me better understand what you meant. I'm all for using more power point!

amazing video covering many really interesting topics in PF2e and TTRPG in general

I'm eagerly awaiting the rest of this series!

Wanted to leave a comment to thank you for this tour de force review of Pathfinder and how it compares to current and previous D&D editions. Started playing with 1st Edition D&D but my most active period was with 3rd Edition / 3.5, mostly skipped 4th and got heavily into 5th. I did try Pathfinder 1st Edition but it was very much 3.75 and at the time I'd played that enough to be very familiar both as a DM and player with many of the problems you highlighted. 5th did fix a lot of those, but you made an excellent and thorough case for PF2's advantages over 5th. We picked up the PF2 Beginner's Box and Core Rulebook after the recent OGL debacle and are giving it a real try. Found your channel originally via Treantmonk and very glad that I did!

This is a great video! I don't remember a time when I was so much enjoying watching system building/developing/comparing video.

I played 3.5 as a kid and pathfinder 1e since 2009. I’m about to finally take the plunge and DM a 2e game. I’ve been pushing back so hard on 2e because I love pathfinder 1e so much, but it feels like I’ve exhausted all pathfinder 1e has to offer me. Fantastic video my guy.

It comes down to if you feel empowered or stifled by systems. As you say, once you've looked up a dozen rules, you'll see that it is brutally straight forward and perfectly fits with everything else. With all of the rules on the table for everyone to see, you can spend time in combat and/or RP instead of needing the DM to finagle rulings all the time.

Great video! For any players interested the Beginner box is the way to go. Our table picked it up last year and it was such a good introduction and we’re still continuing the campaign well after it.

I comand my first session of pf2e yesterday, it was very nice. Your videos are very helpfull to demonstrate to my old hags attached to DnD for 10 old years more, to try something different. Tx man. (Sorry for my bad english, I'm from Brazil.)

I was also not impressed with the playtest and didn't want to switch from 1e, but your videos convinced me to try it and I have not looked back. Well done.

Never understood the limit on magic items 5E imposed. If I wanted to play low-magic setting I would do so myself.

Thanks to you I switched to Pathfinder 2E and also started DMing now as well

Love this series so far!

Very concise comparison. Interesting to a new 2e convert like myself

Great video, was an excellent listen. Wanted to add for others, that if you like the 3 actions idea, but still want to play 5e, you can add three actions to 5e, to a fashion, with little problems. Action, move action, bonus action. Each one can be used to do the action on the right. So an action can do anything, but a move action can only do a move or bonus action. Etc. Am playing it in a game right now, and its had almost no issues.

Just came from having mastered BG3 and holy shit have you made me fall in love. Pf2e solves EVERYTHING that has annoyed me about larians version of 5e. When I play BG3 I constantly think 'the game is amazing, but it would be so much better if this rule was X instead' and all of those thoughts are so far addressed by Pf2e. Fucking magic item overload man, nothing feels special once you hit the underdark.

Fantastic content, very thorough excellent stuff 😊

Can confirm about buff stacking in 3e/pf1. Played through Shattered Star abusing stacking buffs. Had the party motto "buffs are running" meaning shoot first and move through quickly since it almost always was the most effective. Actually was a slog to play since modifier conditionality made each round an accounting chore but the variance was still low (things died quickly).

I'm hooked. Seems like such a sweet spot inbetween Pathfinder 1e and D&D 5e.

1:04:00 o like the ways you can use your skills in combat, they are not only for roleplay moments, they have tactical uses too, almost all skills

I can't wait for the rest of these "Pathfinder Law School Courses." Love them, and the syllabus at the beginning leaves me craving for future lessons on the list XD Edit. "How to caster good" at #12, I am extremely interested in what you have to say... Putting it last seems intentional, Nice touch

This is such a great video! I very much look forward to more in this series! (But please don’t overwork yourself)

That was a great breakdown. I must say, I had a much different experience with D&D. I ate my teeth on 3rd edition (later PF 1st) and we have tried a lot of crazy builds, but never really managed to break the game that much. Perhaps because we generally limited our games to lvl 10. There was also never really a problem with buffing before the fight, or the five minute adventuring day. I believe this was thanks to how we started with boardgames and had the idea/preconception that we should get as much done within a session as possible. Playing official scenarios also helped in this regard. All of this combined into making us much more focused on executing cool ideas than min-maxing our characters. All that being said, I love how Pathfinder threw out all of the clunky rules regarding what you can do in a round for a simple, streamlined system.

The spell casting action economy makes me want to play it just for that.

I have barely started the video and hit a like just because these are always so well done. Though I'm leaning toward going back to 1e after some clunky details and meh caster feel (dimension door 1/day? not in my world! lol ). we'll see how this video impacts that feel.

I think that with this video many of the complaints to 2e will be over, or at least they should be. A wide and complex analysis of the two systems with their collective five editions was necessary for an extensive comparison. Well done Ronald 👍🏼

Great video, thanks for sharing!

I am happy I got the humble bundle for Pathfinder 2e. I will hopefully be able to talk my players into trying 2e next campaign.

A great video, thanks for going into this detail. PF 2e is not for me but I appreciate some of its improvements.

Okay, I had my thoughts about Pf2e as a new-ish D&D 5e DM... Now I have none, I just am thinking on the best way to fill my homebrew world with Pf2e ancestries (because everything else already fits, and furthermore, it fixes some of my concerns, one of them being the fact that some regions have to have more advanced magic.). Thank you so much for this video!

Great video. Thank you for making this! One thing that I found was a big distraction was your camera going in and out of focus all the time. Otherwise loving the series.

I love this analysis, it highlights the issues and the different solutions, and confirms why I loved some bits of 4e .. I am just starting to play PF2e and most of it I like - oddly the only thing I miss from 5e is being able to split movement, which did make fights more mobile (but your point about why it tended not to be I agree with) The 5e Terrasque is a bad example ... as it is used to devastate the city the players are defending, it can be surprisingly quick and is very destructive, and trivial to kill over a large number of rounds, but by which time the city lies in ruins ... the other high level monsters are a bit more than sacks of hit points ... but still not as interesting as they can be - I suspect this is to make life easier for the DM?

Like always amazing job

...but my torture scenes! 🤣 Didn't even mention one of the most brilliant things to happen to Skills: Assurance! Give players the capability of choosing between a stable number that they know will help in a great number of situations or roll for that sweet critical success... even allows you to fight against circumstancial and status penalties! Want to build a party that's actually competent in sneaking in most places? Assurance! Follow the Expert! Want to mitigate your multiple attack penalty on Athletic checks in combat? Assurance! Swimming and Climbing? Assurance! Medicine? Deception? Intimidation? Assurance! It gives you that feeling of what Expertise TRIES to do in 5e, by just giving you a reliable number you can always trust.

The D&D server I belong to just started a PF2 game. They seem to be having a good time so far!

I am *eagerly* awaiting course #12 - How to Caster Good. I love casters, but I'm still learning Pf2e so I'm struggling to find a fun build I like.

Again. Amazing video. Keep it up!

Loved this vido, highly informative and well done, I was wondering what your mod list for foundry is because it looked pretty good and had some interesting features.

I am glad my group has given PF2e a chance as we are all LOVING the game and setting.

What is the module are you using that highlights the movement increments? That looks really useful

12:10 Item bonuses can also change in combat from elixirs, such as a Drakeheart mutagen.

21:27 One barbarian with 2 casters strapped to the front and the back. I don't know if Fly's weight requirements but assumed it similar to regular encumbrance and the two casters were within the encumbrance of the barbarian.

I personally think first edition is one of the best ttrpgs ever made, but as its a dead game ive finally decided to move on and learn about second edition. Your videos are an amazing resource. Thank you!

If it takes the best things from other editons, that's good.

There are definitely moments in your videos where I see the lawyer come out. "This benefits the player who is (pause) in the know, and is not obvious to the (slight emphasis) new player." This juror is convinced. 😆

when I camed to pathfinder I was surprised that it solves nearly every problem fro dnd 5e caster vs martial disproportion - check suck or save effects (that are useless or overpowered at the same time) broken game balance (CR is a joke) rules that doesn't work as written and need a lot of interpretation to work everything is "up to GM" boring but strong ASI vs feets and that only a tip of things that pf do better than dnd5e

Note that at least in 3.0 wandering monsters were part and parcel of the rules (see the DMG). The game simply wasn't designed without them. Also the DM was instructed to use a variety of challenges, not just '4 per day' (apparently very few people bothered to read the damn book!) I never had '15 minutes adventuring days'.

I haven't yet played PF2e, but one thing that appeals to me a lot is the lack of different rule systems that you have to learn for each class, and all the different trackers that come with that (superiority dice, channel divinity, etc etc). In that regard, spell slots almost looks like a leftover vestige (and indeed, 4e went even further and got rid of those too, but at the cost of introducing the clunky at-will/encounter/daily distinction).

I ran the Pathfinder beginner box a few weeks ago and it was okay but the only times I was having fun was when I had to change everything about it to the point it wasn't anything like Pathfinder. There was too much combat and the social encounters said what the possibilities were so when the players did something else I would just say "you can't do that since it says nothing about it" which made it boring so on the second floor I just made everything up. The players opened a kobold nursery and collected all the kobolds and then at the end made a kobold army and they killed the dragon in one hit. I've never played dnd 5e and Pathfinder 2e was my first ttrpg so I'm not sure if it's exclusive to Pathfinder. I thought it would be something where you can be creative, doesn't have much rules, you can avoid combat at all times and even when there is rules, they are very light and say at the start that they can and should be altered so I know it's okay to do that and also everyone isn't extremely overpowered. I think I might try something from the OSR next since I've not fully dedicated to Pathfinder.

In PF1, the imbalance was extreme. It was not a theoretical discussion about fairness, but just a wildly huge discrepancy (you could easily have some characters almost untouchable with 40+ AC [not at level 1, but still] while others had around 25 AC). Notably, I remember having to ignore tons of *flavor and RP Feats,* (which was sad for a RPG) to take the one that helps in combat (I was dreaming that some should be called Minor Feats, so players would take non-combat Feats every x levels). Oh, and you should have seen the incredible complexity of some character sheets due to stacking 5 to 10 buffs. :P

Man, I love Archetype system so much.

After seeing this I think I found a personal "final" verdict in the 5e vs pathfinder 2e discussion. A beginner is perhaps happy to have less valid choices especially in combat, just getting locked in combat and attacking each turn is much less complicated than having choices. At least most times I have seen more elaborate stuff during combat being tried in 5e the DM simply decided on the fly how this might function, so more "work" for the DM but very easy for the player. For more advanced players on the other hand more valid things to do sound simply great. So I guess 5e stays the easier entry point for players with a more experienced DM while pathfinder may be the more enjoyable system long term also and especially for the DM and perhaps the easier entrypoint for new dms with experienced players. The question that I am asking myself now is if the 5e entry is that much easier to make it worth being less interesting in the long run.

Thanks for this thorough step by step analysis, I think it will be useful to those embarking on their own system designs and for many relatively new to PF2e DMing, like myself, identifying the design goals deepens understanding and therefore running the system to its potential.

Best advertising for pf2. I paly pf2 not for long, but i love it by second sight

Thank you for doing this!!!

So one of my favorite examples of how brilliant the archetype/dedication feats are in the system is my current Wild Order Druid I'm playing, His shapeshifting gets naturally stronger as he levels up, instead the class feats he has available add more versatility options when shapeshifting, but that doesn't matter to Marco the Dwarven Druid, because he only shapeshifts into a gorilla as he frontlines for the group, and is taking Wrestler archetype feats so he can manhandle anything in his way with athletic checks. I was blown away at how smoothly the combo works. I almost feel like I'm using free archetype rule even though we aren't in this group.

Fantastic video!

Long but excellent video. PS I hope youtube paid you allot on this. I had ads break in at least 4-5 times during vid.

5e made feats optional, however I haven't heard of or played many campaigns that went with turning the option off. They exist certainly, but nearly everyone I've interacted with or seen play has had feats enabled. Which makes sense considering they help martials stand out from casters.

You helped to sell me on the system, thank you for that. :)

Great video. I’ve been playing PF2e for a few months now (in parallel with me playing a sporadic D&D5e game and DMing another). So I’ve constantly flipping between the systems. I like both for different reasons. One thing that has become apparent however now playing 7th level characters was the over balance towards melee classes (specifically fighters) in comparison to playing a caster. You definitely feel less powerful in PF2e as a caster compared to D&D5e. The spells a nerfed, the prepared and heighten rules make deciding what to prepare not fun (when you had the perfect spell but can’t cast it). It's too strict. The focus spells for the most part are meh. On the other hand, the fighter deals as much damage as a fireball consistent with a single melee attack and then can does it twice more per round. The heal wound feature means that between every encounter melle classes are back to full strength while the casters are down to cantrips. There ability to hit (extra +2?) just makes them so significantly better than the other classes. Which depending on upon the players could be meaningless. But with some players who like to optimize a little, leaves you with a party half full of fighters and the remaining players feeling like second class citizens. I think the casters to fighter relationships needs to be better balanced. It’s also more crunchier with all the different conditions (some like hiding is ridiculously complicated) so you need everyone on board with a crunchier game. Our PF group loves it. My D&D group…. well they are still playing D&D. Guess I’m in the middle (though the 3 action system is definitely > than the action + bonus action)!

My main issue with 1e was its shelf life. it lasted so long that multiple abilities and feats and archetypes would have the same name. There'd need to be a parenthesis or something. There'd also be one set of abilities that are objectively better like, "Here's a feat that lets you add dex to your attack" and "here's a feat that lets you add dex to your attack, AND damage." I don't know if this is an accurate example, but it's how it felt. Power creep was a thing, refreshing stuff should solve that issue. With that being said, with all the errata and adventure book related feats, I'm worried things are getting messy again.

A note about action economy, bounded accuracy and the 5e balance guidelines. The issue does not lie with bounded accuracy or action economy but rather the guidelines being terrible, you can with a bit of tinkering and thought make much better guidelines. There is a weird and inconsistent relation between creatures xp and CR ratings that is so bad that I have no clue how they even came up with it. So the obvious thing to notice from just looking at some stat blocks in the monster manual is that higher CR level creatures award more XP per HP and Damage compared to lower CR enemies. This makes sense since it SHOULD be more rewarding to fight more difficult foes. The issue is that you budget encounters based on XP and not on how strong the creatures awarding that XP actually are. 2 CR 3 enemies are roughly as strong as 1 CR 6 enemy if we look at the CR guideline (calculation below)* but the two CR 3 enemies give 700 * 2 = 1400 XP while the CR 6 creature gives 2300 XP, so when budgeting with XP like the guidelines suggest you should throw 3 CR 3 enemies instead of 1 CR 6 which we can clearly see is a much harder encounter. And we are still using few enough creatures that the guidelines for multiple enemies doesn't come into effect and it still breaks. * Calculation for comparative strength of 2 CR 3 vs 1 CR 6: CR 3 has 13 AC, +4 to hit, 115 hp, 26 damage. While CR 6: 15 AC, +6 to hit, 160 hp, 44dmg. +4 to hit vs 15 AC gives a 50% hit chance, while +6 to hit vs 13 AC gives a 70% hit chance. This gives us 26*2*0.5 = 26 damage for the CR 3 creatures attacking the CR 6 one. While the CR 6 creature has 44*0.7 = 30.8 damage. The weaker creatures have more hp to make up for it (220 total vs 160) but also the added weakness of losing half their total damage once one is killed. Over all fairly even in strength.

Curious. What happens if you have a both a circumstance penalty and a circumstance bonus?

One thing I did like about pathfinder 2e is spell slots being prepared I honestly like 5e with doing prepared spells instead

I enjoyed this video. I think the history and evolution of the game are well presented. I know that this video is all your opinion and that stating that over and over can get tedious. I would have preferred if the facts and opinions could have been separate. For example, "1e/2E did it this way. 3E/PF1 did it that way. (4E or not) 5E does it another way. Here is PF2's take on it. I prefer PF2 but saw the value of the others." I do know this waters down your argument for PF2 but it would be a better balanced approach to how games handled certain sitautions. Thanks!

I'm very curious to know what you'd think of my approach of DnD, overhauling everything by deconstructing it. I made most of my houserules in 3E, but in 5E and One DnD it's even more clear. You have: core benefits that all in a class group have in common (hitpoints, caster levels and skills/expertise), class abilities and subclass abilities. Why not make lists of these and construct classes in a consistent and flexible way? You can make it so classes are intrinsically (somewhat) balanced by having the same number of building blocks. Weaker ones can be used as requirements for stronger ones. Mostly you need a better balance between feats/options (need more) and the raw power of the nice but boring core (need less). Just look at high level casters in DnD novels, so much more flavor and flexibility along with just spells and caster level. A simple fix to the problem of 3E multiclassing is make make it the default, so you never have to nerf your main class by mixing in others. A caster picks some warrior levels and gains some hitpoints and proficiency that way, some expert levels to increase amount and level of skills. You can have a mundane mix of warrior and expert, or mix caster levels. Reconstructing classes this way totally changes what you get per character level, but also what levels mean. A 50-50 core/option ratio means your 20 level wizard is only a 10th level caster. But you'd start at 4 or so (instead of the front loading level 1), and level 11-20 in 5E don't really work anyway. Spells do need to be rebalanced, but many high level spells are unbalanced filler anyway or just stronger versions of lower ones. Even better if you "back load" classes, by give an extra level every 5. The extra benefit can be the major ones that effect action economy: extra attack, canny action and similar abilities for casters (sustain more spells or apply metamagic?). For symmetry every 5 levels you'd then have 3 core, 2 options (one class one subclass) and 1 major ability. With 3 actions and one reaction, you'd have 4 to upgrade. If you want you can envision an epic range of levels. I'm still working on raw outlines for a few NPC's (Dark Sun advanced beings). It used a psion class that mixes passive abilities (that Monks, Druids, outerplanars, Drow and other magical species have, mainly resistances and longevity) with manifesting psionic powers that function as cantrips and spell-like abilities that don't use vsm components. This psion level is a measure for supernatural nature and boosts spellcasting but also synergizes well with warrior/expert levels (like monk, psychic warrior, soul knife). This is perfect to portray all kinds of powers we expect various types of elves to have. This way they kind of evolve into a Eladrin or noble Drow. You could rule it's not a fixed bloodline but magical awakening that lets a human or anyone ascend to become elemental (genie like Djinn and Efreet) or draconic, celestial or infernal. Dwarfs may only culturally prefer the element Earth, or heritage might give an actual aptitude.

Great Video, although I was looking for the fly in my room at 1:10:34 :D

Thumbs up for the dance moves👍.