Jacob gaslighting Jacob

Damn I really thought I fooled you

@@funkymunky7935 Trust nobody, not even yourself

The were just sating behind him. Without a 360 camera view, we may never know!

@@XPtoLevel3 Hey, Jacob! Love your content, my guy. Wanted to get your take on a trait that I plugged into a Pathfinder campaign that could probably be adapted to 5E: LEGENDARY CELERITY Whether by powers divine, profane, or otherworldly, [INSERT BOSS NAME HERE] draws from their innermost wells of might to move and act at speeds that defy reason. After determining the starting initiative order for this combat encounter, roll an additional initiative check. This character performs their turn on both of these turns in the initiative. This additional turn in initiative cannot be performed before the initiative determined for this character at the start of the combat encounter. At the start of each subsequent round, reroll the additional initiative check to determine the new order of the second turn for that round.

I agree, it would allow you to make a gambit at finishing off the enemy but getting wrecked in the process.

And I think that would make more sense when you are healead in battle. I hate when you fall unconscious, is healed and can instantly do whatever you were doing, and have "know" what happened while you were unconscious.

@@LucasStraub Yeeeep. Back from the dead with 1 HP? Great! I will now unload at my full killing potential, same as usual, just with a higher chance of going down again with zero consequences unless I die die.

I’m not a fan it makes any fight past 5th level just a bunch of gods who don’t need to fear death. Imagine a Druid who is level 7 and is currently at 0hp. With the dying condition they can bonus action healing word themselves using a 1st level slot then wild shape into an owl to fly away. That sounds fun in theory but being at 0hp in 5e isn’t even that bad since they can just be healed. If the party was fighting an adult red dragon and this Druid went down from its breath weapon it no longer feels dangerous just more of a mild inconvenience. This rule will make combat’s favor players even more making the game less of a game and more of a spell slot draining simulator. The ideal strategy with it now is going to 0hp then cast healing word and an attack cantrip. Big spells are literally suboptimal to an aggressive degree so much so anyone who understands how valuable of a resource spell slots are now will limit all the actual cool spells they can cast just to avoid true death.

Yeah, Healing Word is dumb!

Conspiracy Theorist. It's very clear to me that the DM is trying to confuse us with his magic and make us believe that all these other people are secretly just one man. Preposterous! Perception Roll (Nat 1, -3 from Abilities, -/+1d4 from ADHD Feat)

Next you are gonna tell me that Eddie Murphy played all the members of his family in The Nutty Professor, minus the kid. Well I am not falling for it. ORRR or or Nikko Ortiz plays Army Guy, Navy Guy, Coast Guard Guy, Marines Guy, Air Force Guy, and Space Force Guy....

I was hoping there'd be a potted plant in one chair and maybe a mop in the other with his characters faces on.

CalebCity levels of acting alone with yourself

Don't be fooled! Jacob has perfected the art of flash cloning and memory transfer; the pan was a red herring designed to make you believe there is only one Jacob. Meanwhile, the Council of Jacob pulls society's strings from the shadows, occasionally stepping into the light to right some egregious wrong, before melting back into the inky blackness.

Oh wait the video is about dnd

Haha....

Same.

Not if you murder EVERYONE!

We’re on such a similar wavelength, me too!!!

Every version of D and D and a few other similar games either seems to want to ban psionicists and mystics or not ban them but make them poorly designed and imbalanced (I've seen both ways too strong and too weak, usually too strong). ~ Some other guy, not the same Jacob's friend, but someone else.

@@Tletna modernity 😔

@@Tletna Mystics are literally just weaker wizard, you're just a brainlet that doesn't understand game design

Yeah imma teleport like 4 miles away, yall can handle this dragon right?

@@benfurnish2052 says the wizard casting teleport

Don’t feel like you *have* to do this though! It might be cool, but also getting knocked unconscious or even dying is normal for D&D.

I just don't see it as a problem to lose agency at times. PCs shouldn't feel like they're absolutely in control all of the time.

@@BigDaddyWes Thank god I'll never have the misfortune of being a player for you as a DM. One of the worst takes someone can give in regards to DnD or any game in general.

@@rylace You can't imagine any narrative reason or mechanical reason where it would be good for a player to lose agency? That seems kind of shallow minded.

This is the acceptable way to win at dnd

Oh I can't play for the next 10 minutes? Okay, hey where is your bathroom. I just had some Taco Bell before coming over. Chaotic Evil and cackling towards the bathroom.

"Stop healing yourself!"

I agree that its dumb, but its also big part of Monks support role.

It's fine against npcs players should have options to still do things at some cost

It seems like any adversity in the game is horrible design to him.

i look at it more as a plot tool honestly you stun the party then scram but even then it can be meh

This

Prodigious size does not offer any intrinsic merit… unless inordinate exsanguination be considered a virtue.

there is a darkest dungeon boardgame. which handles death door a little bit better for tabletop then a pc game

Survival is a tenuous proposition in this sprawling tomb

There’s a difference!

@@XPtoLevel3 I've been thinking about it... for the... 10 minutes since I heard it in the video... How about waiting until the boss is under a certain HP threshold, and THEN when someone does something really cool, pronounce it as dead? I had a moment where I could have done this in 2 different groups, and I severely regret not doing it like that...

@@XPtoLevel3 What I do is I basically have a range of "this is the actual HP to chew through" and then past that, the coolest blow (or if it would be a narratively satisfying kill for a certain PC) gets the HDYWTDT

There's a difference in these things

@@JJ24x7 In a way: yes this is cool In another way spiritual weapon has now become sort of a meme within our group because I keep killsniping with it most extreme example was when my buddies 12th level paladin just UNLOADS like 150+ damage into the BBEG, and then next turn my clerics spell does nothing, but my floating trident (which I almost forgot) pokes him for 6 damage and he keels over dead its stupid, yes, but its also hilarious. and since our campaign was kind of silly anyway it seemed to strangely fit

That's a great idea! I know this is 4 months old but just know that I am definitely adding this to my set of homebrew rules.

I disagree, stunning doesn't destroy choice. It's your choice to fight the enemy, if you do that there's consequences. It's like saying dying gets rid of choice, you shouldn't have run into traffic then, you DID choose death. Also, obviously it's bad, it's not fun, it's a bad feeling. It shouldn't be good. Having a game where only the bad things you WANT to have happen is not truly bad, what kind of game is that? What kind of game would it be if we didn't allow something frusterating to happen? Plus it doesn't make sense, you can be stunned in reality, stunning is an actual mechanic that makes sense so it just doesn't make sense for it to just not be in the game. Also, you CAN get out of it. You can probably have dispel magic or greater restoration but you. Yes your team has to do it but so? Why are we acting like that means it's bad? This game requires teamwork and that's a good thing to have something where your friends NEED to save you. Stun isn’t the only time this happens, should we get rid of that? Should we get rid of falling off a cliff unless you personally have featherfall? Even if you jump off? I think it makes sense to have the ability to make multiple saves for every stun, each time you fail you lose that turn.

@@HelloThere..... well, the beauty of d&d is that you can make your own campaign the way you want if you don't want stun, you can rework it or remove it if you want it, you can keep it the way it is choose whatever gives you the most enjoyment!

​@@HelloThere.....So you think it's a good idea for party members, or even entire parties, to just sit out of all combats & confrontations just in case stun might happen, rather than just modifying the rule? Also, if you think everyone actively chooses to die irl (and that accidents or unavoidable things never happen), you're really naive. Or like 8 years old.

I have seen "Monster with multiple initiative" in a really awful way, and generally, I feel like that kinda messes with the action economy

Seems way more complicated and also worse than legendary actions

So eager to murder his allies that he decided to ignore what charmed actually does.

@@idiotcube The basic "charmed" condition doesn't do that, but the majority of charm effects against players usually have additional modifiers, ie "On a fail, the creature is charmed. While charmed, they are under the control of this creature" or whatever. While its not the charmed condition itself that's doing it, it is true for most context in which player characters are charmed.

Holding back while dominated and told to fight your previous allies is hella metagaming, and it would really sour the mood (at least at my table). If you would go all out and nova the enemy, then while dominated you better go all out and nova your allies just the same, no preferential treatments for anyone just because you have out-of-game knowledge and allegiances.

@@Orillion123456 There would still be, on a more instinctual level, an idea that the people you are fighting are good guys. Kinda like how people are lenient to their friends even when they know that something they did was bad and they should be reprimanded for that. Why, in fantasy, people are so much more reluctant fighting former allies even when they know that their actions are irredeemable.

NO… 👀

I know what you mean, gives me the same feeling as Seth

@@chiefnewo Seth skorkowsky? The call of Cthulhu guy?

💯💯💯

it kind of makes my brain confused when he moves the camara and the clone is not there

To be fair, he makes a living on D&D and DMs regularly. That's kind of the skill he spends the most time honing. :)

shitty rules for shitty players, makes sense

This is like strapping a kid to a table if they misbehave. You either give real consequences, (the barb killed or they get away with it, but later are tracked down and hanged for murder.) Or you tell the player correct themselves if you really don't want them to do it. It's easy to just stop the player from doing bad things, but you should also make sure they understand why they shouldn't do it and don't do it later.

Based on the 20 minute video I just watched, I think stun is considered a real consiquence by some people. It's like the dnd community is split into dozens of gatekeeping sub-factions who hurl their backseat advice at eachother like "IF YOU STUN YOUR PLAYERS AS A PUNISHMENT YOURE FUCKING TOXIC BRO"

I think that sounds like a really great roleplaying opportunity that would go to waste if you just stun them for trying to be in character. Nothing wrong with them getting overwhelmed by other means though. Maybe even the party could turn on them and help restrain the barbarian if they felt like it (DM could give a nudge with an NPC ordering them to help stop their barbarian before things get ugly). Things could go a few ways, the party could agree and the barbarian gets restrained and sent to jail (maybe a prison break ark could be planned in the future (also drives home consequences of your actions)) OR maybe the party would rather fight right then and there with their barbarian and it gets chaotic. I could also see the knights taking the challenge up and fighting the lone barbarian to uphold their honor. Pretty much "Alright you wanted 30 on 1 you've got it."

@@Lady-V Getting stunned *is* the roleplaying opportunity. If they've been rejecting self-control and sharing the table with their peers then stunning them effectively forces them to develop self-control and share the table with their peers. It's a moment of "You're being punished for your behavior. You can roleplay out the stun properly, maybe even toss in some muffled grunts here and there, and allow others at the table to actually play the game or you can refuse to roleplay and storm off, leaving the table until such time that we allow you back in." Sometimes shutting up and sitting down *is* roleplaying. As a (reasonably used) penalty, it's good. As a combat tactic, especially if there are multiple foes who can use it against the party repeatedly, is bad.

What if they were okay with it? Would that be.. Comfortably Numb?

Yeah, that's how _Unknown Armies_ RPG does it: The gamemaster runs everyone's HP, and the rulebook spends time stating the GM should never say "you get hit for [n] damage" but instead to vividly describe the injury. But the authors also encourage the GM to fudge enemy rolls or enemy/player character HP if it makes for a better scene, or allow PCs to survive if it's in the middle of the adventure and it would be a pointless death. Although, I must add, _Unknown Armies_ is an Urban Fantasy Psychological Horror Game, with elaborate yet intuitive rules mechanisms for a sanity/trauma system better than Call of Cthulhu's, and combat _is_ meant to be realistically deadly, as you play mostly-normal humans with limited HP, and modern weapons or even swords can potentially kill someone on first hit... so the system differs massively from D&D in that players are meant to try and _avoid_ combat when possible, and injury penalties apply. The vibe of D&D's heroic High Fantasy combat is very different.

​@@10GaugeManiacperfect

@@10GaugeManiac you just gave me Brain Damage

That's such a great idea!

That's my biggest pet peeve.

I like zero is dead and that’s it. But I’m more than willing to let the player narrate last words. Players behave so differently when zero means death.

@@jenningscunningham642 Might be best to adjust balance accordingly if zero hp is death cause otherwise people are gonna be dropping left and right from enemy crits at moments that aren't very interesting to die in anyways

@@elzed2667 death has nothing to do with being interesting

@@jenningscunningham642 personally I'd reason it's a lot more fun to die at a climactic moment to the main villain than to die through no fault of your own to kobold #6 because they rolled 10 damage with their sling against your 9 hp wizard. given the goal of playing games is having fun, I'd rather leave room for players to be healed later in those circumstances, as is the default in the game. High-threat monsters often even have that zero hp clause built in past a certain CR in a similar fashion to Disintegrate, with the exact intention to ensure when players do die it'll be to big threats rather than to lucky goons.

Yeah, a wizard can get away with it. It'll be painful to move half and have crappy saves but it's doable. Someone like a melee oriented fighter though, you're fucked.

You should check out Gurps! It uses a really cool mechanic for "death saving throws." I will explain in dnd terms: Characters do not immediately fall unconscious upon reaching 0hp, but roll CON checks every turn to see if they fall unconscious. I really love this mechanic because it extends the life of the heros, and gives them those cinematic moments. "As blood pours from his wounds, and his vision begins to close in... just one more attack to kill the witch.. ~attack roll succeeds~ And with his blade plunged through the heart of evil, the warrior finally falls." Yes, this would severely imbalance health pools in dnd, but I'm sure you can figure something out 😉😊

it works, it combines the 5e fatigue mechanics with 3e negative hit points, i like it, I'm stealing it

You can totally do this though? What is stopping you from roleplaying after dropping to 0?

This is really neat because even after the condition ends, that tension is still there

this is sooooo evil@@maikomarx

I was thinking of this too. How nice it would be to air that stuff out finally and be all, I was charmed I don't know what you mean... Especially nice to put in the face of a player who pulled a "I'm chaotic neutral it's what I would have done" a little while ago on you. It's not a good Idea mind you, it'll just put logs on that fire, but it's FUUUUNNNN. So screw that guy. he needs his medecine.

Brilliant

I used my bonus action to make cereal though

Make Intelligence saving throw to be able to do things, while listening the vid

speak for yourself i’m doing a lot of things while watching this. Like lying down. And breathing.

@@elainasynranelt How much damage does your breathing do?

@@u.v.s.5583 1d6 psychic

That's fucking awful. Getting paralyzed for an entire combat was the second-to-last drop that made me leave my previous DnD group, and at least we remembered to roll saves. I just kept failing them. (To be clear, my list of gripes was already _extensive_ by that point.) Nothing makes a player stop having fun faster than making them unable to act for no good reason. Like, a single round of stun? Still not great but manageable. Several rounds of being unable to act? No. Fuck that. Never do that to a player. No, not even to control the one problem player. It's just gonna piss them off and escalate matters.

@@Tengila Eh, depends on the party make up. Lesser Restoration is a 2nd Level spell that completely negates Paralysis, but is only on Divine spell lists.

@@Tengila it's nobody's fault that you rolled badly

@@Tengila Soooo do your players just never suffer status effects?

@@slayeroffurries1115 It's actually quite obviously the games fault that it's even an option to "roll badly". Don't get me wrong, variance is fun. Horrible consequences as a result of random chance is not fun (...depending on the players, obviously. No one size fits all.).

I also love playing Life Cleric. Best part about that is the panic that sets in when the BBEG Is actually tactical and focuses you down on the second encounter, then watching the sheer panic set in among the other party as they're no longer invincible.

yeah i've found that people that complain endlessly about getting CC'd are ones that NEVER play with a utility player (like a radiant servant of pelor with all util spells). and then you get magic items to make sure that player can't be stunned/etc

@@Gunbudder That's off base from what they were talking about, you're just putting blame on people for making choices which is the entire point of Jacob's video. The other person was just glad as someone who enjoys playing a healer, that they get recognized for what they provide to the group. You're inverting that, and suggesting that people should play certain characters and use certain abilities whether they want to or not. We all complain at times, especially when we're inconvenienced while trying to have fun, I wouldn't hold it against them unless they were really being unreasonably hysterical about it all.

Same, but Grave Cleric... because I'm waiting for people to nat 1 death saves and be on 0.

That reminds me of some good ideas Warhammer Age of Reckoning had. It was an MMO that's mostly forgotten as a failed WoW killer, but I think it did a lot right, like some ideas they had about CC. There was an ability that was a 2 second damage over time but its duration reset if you were moving. So it wasn't a hard immobilize. The victim had to choose if and when it was worth stopping to stop the damage. Also, the way taunt worked in PvP was that the target's damage was reduced by a certain percentage until they had attacked the taunter a fixed number of times. So control was never taken away, but they were mechanically encouraged to attack the person using taunt, if they wanted to maximize damage. Compelled Duel is kind of similar in DnD, but why not use that philosophy for more abilities to add, rather than remove, combat decision-making? Why not have a similar soft taunt ability available as a bonus action to martial classes? Taunt: Bonus Action: Target has disadvantage on attack rolls against other targets until they attack the caster. Only one target can be affected at a time.

That's cuz you understand that you are not a main character, and that you are a member of a party and not a critical role stan that cries at the first sign of difficulty

​@@ShugoAWay not sure what Critical Role had to do with this but okay?

@@ShugoAWayAnd you are what? A bitter judgmental ass. Being bitter and judgmental doesn’t make people who don’t act like you think they should any better. Meaning you are stuck. You’ll get worse and more bitter and frustrated, and they’ll not be better or learn anything, and rightfully dislike you more the worse you get.

Sure, but not every combat is that interesting. It works when people roleplay, I can just watch but watching combat is often not as much fun.

​@@nojusticenetwork9309because they treat the game more like a tv show and not a normal game and in the same way people will play skyrim and try to play d&d like it I imagine critical roll fans try to play like the people from the show. Also you just need to step out of the spotlight and let other players do stuff sometimes.

Honestly, that's pretty clever. I think I might use that encounter. (After a bit of tweaking)

Poison Cloud or water-filling trap in a room of skeletons

​@@sidecharacter7165 skeletons would not do well in a room filling up with water

​@@shadow-faye why not? I'm genuinely curious.

@@Kingohel skeletons cannot swim and would therefore be dealing with difficult terrain, also, depending on how high the ceiling is, the skeletons will eventually just be standing at the bottom while the players swim around above their heads

Paralyze certain limbs only. Or give certain amount of rounds until paralysis kicks in could be interesting 🤔.

@@nicholaspitti8171 maybe have it build up exhaustion levels ? since they already simulate slowed movement and limited mobility? sorta like you failed that saving throw against the basilisk, so now instead of not getting to play the game, you are at a serious disadvantage until next rest. but if you fail again the penalty gets much worse until eventually it kills you

I really wanted to like your comment but you have 69 likes soo....

Are you a painter lady?

I tend to implement a "taking damage gives you another save" rule for these things, plus allowing other players to attempt to help each other break out of the status effect.

​@@solosynapse yeah that usually goes a long way, Tho I often also add a creature specific way to break the effect Either giving the target advantage on the save or ending the effect without needing to succeed a save. Usually this means getting hit with a specific damage type and/or amount, But if casting Vicious Mockery guarantees the fighter to wake up, That might just be worth it.

I had to make a rule like that but for restraining-type things due to a certain player of mine who shall not be named. It works quite well! In my case, due to it being for kind of manual restrain-grapple type things (the player kept trapping people under sheets of various fabrics, but it'd apply to things like holding an oven door closed as well), it's based off of the difference between the perpetrator's and the victim's STR.

The downside to this is that if you don't use your RP during encounters and save them up, PCs are extremely hard to kill. As a GM designing encounters, it's nearly impossible to create resource attrition, and usually if I want to challenge my player in a fight I have to go all out with a deadly encounter. I love the system don't get me wrong.

That sounds dumb. Seems like something you’d either never use cuz you’d be afraid of dying instantly the moment you go down, or something that would fuck you over cuz you never go down so you use all your points, then you end up taking like 1 damage from stepping on a Lego brick and instantly dying

@@nekomancer47 You don't die instantly when you go down with no resolve points, you have a full round for someone to heal or stabilize you.

@@jules3484 As a GM, I would create situations where players could expend RP. Like giving the players a choice between becoming exhausted or expending a RP to push through a situation without any penalties. Or giving a player an option to expend an RP to boost an attack kinda like Goku increasing his Kaio Ken to boost his Kamehameha.

yeah feels like exhaustion is sorta underused becuase dms give their players frequent rests and players are like SUPER carefull about not getting it applied becuase the peneltys are huge

Agreed, that's really cool

It is not a tradeoff, sleeping off a level of exaustion is not hard, but hos system makes any party with a cleric literally immortal, because befor you could target the cleric so they would need protection, because if they go down your support is down so you cant leave your cleric to 1v3. With this idea? Cleric can heal themselves while being at 0 hp, it removes risk from the party because now no matter what their cleric literally cant die while he has spellslots.

A very light and simple version of Jacob's rules that I've run for a while was just to have each failed death save grant one level of exhaustion. This limits them to only a couple near-death bounces at 0hp. But, as a tradeoff, they don't go unconscious at 0hp unless they have that 5th level of exhaustion.

@Graine I don't know. You're right it could be min maxed abhorrently, it only takes 6 levels of exhaust to die, at 2 your speed is halfed. And for the adverage party dungeon crawling having half speed or half ability checks could certainly hurt, you only get 1 level back so unless they bunker for weeks on a dungeon it can slap a little, and mostly I just never interact with exaust so it'd be nice to goof around with it. (Plus the circles I play in don't really worry about "having supports" because they thought having 5 sentient rock barbarians would be a funny party.)

👆👆Thanks ⬆️ for watching ⬆️⬆️ and commenting gor a special package for you, messages me on telegram app to claim your prize...🎁

Unless it's the support that gets hit by it. Then you're reliant on hoping you have the right saving throw proficiency to make the save in less than 3 turns.

The “dying” condition is also more cinematic. It emulates what happens in the movies: character on the ground, leaning against a wall, hand over their grievously wounded abdomen, speaking through a wincing grimace, “I don’t think I’m gettin’ outta this one. You go on without me. Don’t worry. Just go. GO!” And then they use their last turn making a tripping attack against the bad guy that’s chasing them, or caving in the roof by casting shatter.

Why not just change the stun condition to you roll a dice save or lose only one turn. And the next time you get stunned you're more immune to it than before. And just give players the option to wear things that resist or immunize them from the stun status while wearing it.

being forced to do absolutely nothing on your turn I imagine sucks what about something like "dazed" instead where you can take actions, but they are distorted in some way like while dazed you can't move in a straight line (have to change direction every 5 feet) and are slower or a "stagger" effect, where if you're hit by a particularly powerful strike, you can choose to move away from the attacker (following through with the recoil) or spend your turn "resisting" in order to stay put.

Plus if you limit what they can do without taking their turn away they can get creative and come up with something clever. Which is just a joy to watch.

Perhaps to simplify it, entering the Dying condition always causes 1 point of exhaustion? It makes more sense too that way.

​@Zooker I think its cus of the death saves and to keep those fair with no modifiers

@@zooker7938it actually doesnt work that well, because then if you are already pretty exhausted from say, frenzy, then it fucks your ability saving throws

At our table, whenever you receive healing while dying, you suffer one level of exhaustion. This means that the party has to make a choice about whether it's better for the downed player to get up and take another level of exhaustion, or to be stabilized and sleep it off. Typically, this means our party hangs out around 0-2 levels of exhaustion, or maybe 3-4 if we're pushing through a serious series of encounters we can't avoid, and it makes everything feel a bit more desperate and gritty.

" them not being desensitized" " they start to panic in fear" I like your style of DMing, gotta try that

When I played a LARP (35+ years of play!) a common "rule" regardless of what version of rules the LARP was up to was that no spell or monster effect could take a player out of play involuntarily for more than 10 minutes. This applied to things like paralyze, sleep, hold person, and poisons that temporarily took away your ability to move or just use skills. resurrected - There were rules where you could OPT to be out of play for up to an hour, but the ten-minute maximum was otherwise a hard rule. Some examples would be being willing to contest a formal ritual and being "in jail" for a minor offense. And if you chose to commit the crime that led to you being jailed, you could opt to go play a monster for that jail time. - The point, I guess, was that the rules were designed to never take away player agency for a long period of time.

Yeah in our campaign we are currently going up against some mind flayers which of course have their stun, grapple, big damage combo. Our DM also reached the conclusion that stun is too long so they have just changed it to a 1 turn stun.

Certain monsters revolve around their incapacitation ability. I often play Ghouls (who paralyze) this way. The players knows as soon as they succeed a save what it was for. And when a ghoul paralyzes someone, they immediately stop fighting and drag the paralyzed player away if they can. The implication is to eat them. Makes them slightly less of a threat while giving the party a clear goal. Doesn't stop the paralyzed player that's repeatedly failing saves something to do, which is still the issue. But at least it's very few monsters that have it.

Personally, I would take a page out of Darkest Dungeon, when it comes to "below 1 hit point".

Death's Door has a ruleset?

Also, can limit the effect for one turn, so there's still a consequence to a failed save, but it's not awful.

Very interesting game mechanic! I'll check the game out. Thanks for sharing

I also thought of Gloomhaven’s stun mechanic. Love to see one of my favorite games get mentioned.

I feel like stuns that take time to build up, And thus can be reacted to, Are fine and should be in the game.

that's an ever faster fix than jacob's dying condition in case anybody doesn't feel like fitting 10 levels of exhaustion into the game - every stun gets nerfed but still functional

@@hugofontes5708 I like the idea that first you cannot use an action and a bonus action in the same turn, Then one level later you can only use a bonus action or movement. And finally you cannot move or take (bonus) actions for 1 turn. (This is a fairly direct translation of the Pathfinder condition, but adjusted to acknowledge the differences in power between the action types in D&D) These rules would allow you to pull shenanigans such as Inflicting 2 levels of stun on a failed save or 1 on a successful one, reducing it by 1 at the end of the target's next turn.

This was by far the best part of the video. More videos of Jacob being Jacob!

Im not the hugest fan but it can add some interesting changes to things like orc ferocity, or the diehard feat.

Being a creator is a difficult job 😂

​@@TheBiomedZed especially with wotc shenanigans

Its literally like werewolfs

the problem is that you can put the players into dire situations that necessitate players assisting each other without excluding one or more of them from that situation, which is what stuns do. You put a player in time out so that the other players get a challenge, which may be fun for the other players, but the one in time out may as well just go do something else until they are allowed to play the game again.

Remember that your death saves are still normal. If you're unlucky you can still die in two or three turns, and if you have no healing options you can use on yourself, well, you better hope a teammate comes to the rescue!

Your situation is more a problem with a general lack of understanding of "charmed" in DnD than anything else. Charming isn't mind control. A charmed person just views the caster as a "friendly acquaintance;" the quote is directly from the spell. If your character wouldn't start attacking his party mates because he was asked to by any person he kind of knows and is on good terms with, then a person casting Charm Person (or equivalent magic) isn't going to get you to do that, either. Now, the higher level Dominate Person can attempt that, but if used in combat, the subject will almost certainly have advantage on the saving throw, and any time the subject takes damage, he gets a new save.

Why didn't they knock the character unconscious?

​@@saldiven2009 I mean charm is sorta super varied on what the effect is. Yes, that's how the charmed condition works, but a charm effect is typically decided by what causes it. For example, Crown of Madness, Hypnotic Pattern, Dominate Beast, and Geas are all technically charms and bonuses against getting charmed apply to them, but none of those inflict the charmed condition. It really isn't that simple, and it could be a monster ability that did it, we don't really know without context 🤷‍♂️

@@saldiven2009 Or, and hear me out here. The narrative called for a full mind control charm that was set up in the plot. Which led to an amazing sequence and an impactful death of a character.

Why didn’t they just knock the character out