The Value of Dynamic, Speedy and Unpredictable Action and Combat

 My group is fizzing out a bit on D&D, and it's probably because the new edition (5/75 or whatever version # you want to give it) is mainly a continuation of standard 5E, which is easily the least exciting version of D&D when it comes to dynamic combat and variables. While it is true that 5E spun out of the 3rd and 4th edition eras where the amount and volume of combat mechanics was either so overwhelming or so procedural that it led to an arms race in rules mastery and tactical acumen among many gamers, the 5th edition response is to create a tepid experience which is fun for a while but eventually it all starts to feel very much like the same thing, over and over again. This might be forgivable if it was quick, but D&D combat is often anything but, even when it is sufficiently simplified that you basically have combat down to a basic roll to hit or save, deal damage, repeat process.

Other game systems manage to do much better and more dynamic combat, but not too many manage to hit the perfect trifecta of being dynamic, speedy and unpredictable. As it happens, perhaps one of the best game systems of all time for dramatic, fun and fast combat comes from the Fast! Furious! Fun! RPG itself: Savage Worlds. Indeed, Savage Worlds is so fast that if you are too used to running typical combat and pacing modules in D&D style format, then it can be a bit shocking to watch Savage Worlds compound the same experience in to less than half the time, leaving the GM scrambling for more content.

This is a roundabout way of me saying that Savage Worlds is back on the menu in my game group, and we will be playing it again, perhaps as early as this weekend, although I have also promised Mothership (which is also engrained with a fast, furious and fun approach to combat!) I'm just so very, very tired of the distinctly samey feel of all things in 5E/5.75E these days, but at least I can identify the burnout as being system-based, and not idea based!

Savage Worlds and Mothership both fit the bill for this sort of more engaging and dynamic but very fast combat approach. I think Mork Borg fits in well, and if you go back to the OSR era then any number of classic OSR games can fit this bill as well. Among more contemporary systems we can get quick and dynamic combat out of Cypher System, too. I'll have to try Dragonbane eventually and see how it feels as well.....I am sure it will be dynamic and unpredictable, but not so sure how speedy it will be. 

Return of the Living Dead RPG Announcement

 So this is kind of exciting: Evil Genius Games is partnering with Living Dead Media, which I guess owns the IP on the Return of the Living Dead films to make an RPG. Announcement here!

On the one hand, I love the idea.....and unlike some other zombie franchises (Walking Dead and so forth) I happen to have a real fondness for the "Return..." series of films. So for me, I would definitely look forward to this. The only problem I foresee is that I worry a bit about the likelihood of this happening, if only because there has been a fair amount of behind-the-scenes dirty laundry aired on Evil Genius Games and its business practices (as well as its connection to bitcoins). How much of that is substantive vs. merely some internal politics is more or less uncertain, best as I can tell....so I will optmistically go for "hopefully any issues have been sorted out over the intervening months," thus explaining this recent announcement.

Evil Genius released Everyday Heroes, a 5E-based reimagining of the original D20 Modern RPG, and then pumped out a bunch of sourcebooks based on classic films of the last several decades. Their treatment on these have all been surprisingly good, managing to make me consider the possibility of running a campaign in the universe of Universal Soldier, a film I utterly derided when I saw it in theaters an eternity ago. They have released movie tie-ins for Rambo, The Crow (original movie), Kong: Skull Island, Total Recall, Escape From New York and Pacific Rim, so if anyone can do this, it would be them. Their release of a Return of the Living Dead RPG would fulfill one of the items on my wishlist, which also includes a "The Thing" RPG spinoff. If you haven't checked out Everyday Heroes, happen to like these movies, and are not burned out on 5E based mechanics, you should take a look! 

When You're In the Mood for "D&D," Just Not Specifically D&D - Mythras Classic Fantasy, Fantasy AGE, Cypher System And Other Weird Variants

 I've had lengthy times where I grew tired of D&D and wanted a break from fantasy, which then led to me running other game systems in different genres such as Mothership, Call of Cthulhu, Savage Worlds and so forth. More recently I have been facing a stranger issue: a desire to run something D&D-like, just NOT actual D&D. I mean, I am running and enjoying D&D....but I know it is less because of the current edition rules at this point than it is because of the campaign I am running, and the sundry plots and characters; the game is succeeding despite itself, not because of itself. Indeed, I realize that my main problem with D&D 5.5 (2024 edition) is that it's frankly just more of the same....lots of noteworthy changes, but none of them shake it up mechanically beyond being a horde of slight iterations. It is like they patched D&D 5E, and you notice the improvements, but ultimately also notice its still just the same game. To run with a video game analogy: they added in ray tracing an patched a loot exploit so it looks cooler and plays more smoothly, but its still the same game you've already played to death.

This has gotten me looking in to other options for a fantasy fix which mix up the mechanics sufficiently that I can feel a breath of fresh air even if I am still running some archetypal adventuring campaigns. I've explored Tales of the Valiant and while I am eager to test it out as a GM, it's still got the same problem D&D 5.5 does; it's just a variant on the thing we've been playing for the last ten years already. Pathfinder 2E Remastered is also good at "D&D like" so it's a bit closer to what I want....but in many ways it is the closest direct competitor to D&D, and has its own unique range of issues when it comes to applying it to classic D&D-ish fantasy without being D&D. 

This leads me to a few other systems I've considered, as follows:

Mythras Classic Fantasy - this just recently received a huge upgrade with the new Mythras Classic Fantasy Unearthed expansion. If you don't know what this is, it's a hack of the Mythras Fantasy RPG (which is itself a valid alternate to D&D) in which it retools the game's chassis to accomodate classes and a very "D&D like" level structure, along with a D&D-derived magic system and plenty of monsters and magic items. It is Mythras at core, but reframes everything to feel like D&D. Specifically it feels like an emulation of AD&D 1st edition, just now powered by a BRP-derived game engine with lots of skills, D100 mechanics and an extra heap of lethality. Cool stuff. 

Pros: Classic Fantasy is a very robust reimagining of D&D style play in a more gritty chassis powered by Mythras; it is well supported with a bunch of modules, main books, the Classic Fantasy Imperative (a ORC-license restatement of the rules as a stand along product, though note you will still want the original Classic Fantasy book for Mythras as it holds all the monsters and more goodies), and the new CF Unearthed book. Plus, you can use all the other Mythras material with it, it's fully compatible.

Cons: I always run into a stumbling block with Classic Fantasy, which evokes for me two things: AD&D and Mythras. I then leave myself wondering if this mix of chocolate and peanut butter really work, or if it makes more sense for me to simply play straight Mythras or straight AD&D. I also prefer BRP Itself, over Mythras, another issue entirely. Also, the special attack rules for Mythras can lead to player decision paralysis, a very common issue I encounter when running Mythras.

Fantasy Age 2E: Green Ronin quietly released Fantasy Age 2nd Edition last year and I am not sure anyone noticed. It's since released a Cthulhu Mythos and Technofantasy expansion on Drivethrurpg, and the 2nd edition is largely backwards compatible with prior books. Fantasy Age, if you did not know, is derived from the Adventure Game Engine (AGE), originally created for the Dragon Age RPG, and this is a full-on iteration designed for use in whatever setting you want. It is class and skill based (though they use focus and talent terms), and is in many ways similar in structural design to D&D with leveling up, escalating hit points and lots of fast paced, hard hitting magic. The latest edition is more robust than the 1st edition Basic Book, too.

Pros: You get a similar experience to D&D but will find Fantasy AGE allows for a lot of design flexibility; its a great system to make unique looking characters, and is pretty easy to GM as well. It has ample support material and the core book is pretty robust.

Cons: Some people find the high starting hit points take getting used to; combats will last longer, sometimes when you don't expect them to. The stunt system unique to Fantasy AGE can lead to a bit of decision paralysis for players, but I find that a few sessions will get them very used to it. Also, because its core design was meant to emulate a video game, it can sometimes feel a tad video-gamish.

Cypher System - Godforsaken and Others: Cypher System has had a lot of expansion into the realm of fantasy gaming in the last several years. The Revised Cypher System rules have plenty of content, but if you add Godforsaken and the Cypher Bestiary you have all you need for a robust D&D-ish campaign but powered by the deceptively simple point-pool system of Cypher. They also have the Planebreaker setting, a new Diamond Throne update and the Ptolus City Setting out for Cypher, most of which were originally settings for D&D 3rd edition or later 5th edition, so its got support for D&D-like campaigns baked in.

Pros: Cypher System is a resource pool game system with player-facing die mechanics which is incredibly easy for the GM to run, and you can simultaneously make very archetypcal D&D-themed characters and also go as off the rails in PC design as the GM is willing to let you. It de-emphasizes a lot of the nitty gritty mechanical elements of D&D, but with the cost advantage of making story and collaborative engagement top priority.

Cons: Cypher System, despite being so cool, can be hard for classic RPG enthusiasts to wrap their heads around, as the pool resource mechanic is counterintuitive to more simulationist rules systems like D&D. Cypher System also works best for GMs (and players) who enjoy improvisation and ad hoc developments, and the game really shines when this is leaned into, but flounders badly if you rgroup does not embrace it.

There are some other ones to consider too! In brief:

Basic Roleplaying, Runequest and Magic World: BRP has a nice new edition update out, and it just got a GM's screen. It's plus is BRP is the best system ever, but its downside is they don't have a single unique modern resource for providing fantasy gaming content. The core book has some material, but its not robust enough. A few years ago before Chaosium changed ownership they published Magic World, which does do exactly that, but its only available in PDF and POD (and had a lot of errata). It's not a bad option, but it is a shame that BRP's latest edition does not have more setting/genre resources out for it, and it continues to get neglected in favor of Runequest. Runequest, in turn, is a great alternative to D&D if you want to really experience something different in the world of Glorantha, but a difficult setting for most to parse out and make their own. If you just want a system to power your own creation, Runequest will disappoint. 

Dragonbane: This is a hybrid reimagining of what the original BRP Magic World of the 80's (from the Worlds of Wonder Boxed Set) became in Sweden, also called Drakar och Demoner, and it was brought back with a Free League flourish, now based on a D20 mechanic instead of a D100 mechanic. It's actually a really neat alternative to OSR D&D gaming, but it needs a bit more support to serve as a broader tool set for enterprising gamers. It also has a problem of looking and feeling like a D&D alternative, but in fact being much closer to its BRP roots and therefore being rather deadly to any game group which plays it like a straight up D&D dungeon crawl. I'm keen on trying this one out eventually, but it's not going to scratch the "D&D but not D&D" itch for me.

Savage Worlds Fantasy and Savage Pathfinder: actually these would work pretty danged well for scratching the "totally D&D feel but not D&D at all" itch. Pathfinder for Savage Worlds brings in classes and themes modeled from Pathfinder 1st edition and is not so wed to Golarion that you can't hack it for your own thing. Add in the SW Fantasy Companion (revised for SWADE) and you have essentially all you need to do everything I've been talking about. The top reason it might not be as ideal is because Savage Worlds excels at being multigenre, and I have found that I enjoy it a lot more in a modern or SF setting than fantasy....though that said, Savage Pathfinder rocks hard. The other problem with Savage Worlds is if you associate hit point bloat and long, protracted combats with the D&D experience, then Savage Worlds may not work for you! It's too fast.

There are others I have not mentioned....GURPS Dungeon Fantasy and the reissue of The Fantasy Trip both come to mind, for example. 

One of my game nights needs a change of system soon. I think it's probably going to be Pathfinder for Savage Worlds, but I might talk them in to a short campaign in Dragonbane just to see how it feels. I am super keen on Fantasy AGE at some point as well, but I really want to absorb the nuances of the system to feel comfortable with it, first....and that requires time I rarely have these days!

Tales of the Valiant and what it Needs Next to Get Adopted by My Group

 I really, really want to play Tales of the Valiant. I am annoyed that D&D 2024 is sufficiently interesting that it is hard not to also want to play it (and is the easier sell, of course); so Tales of the Valiant is mostly getting "behind the scenes" love from me as a GM while I wait for that tipping point when I think that it will also be an easy sell to my players. Really, it needs two things from my perspective to become the next ruleset we try out: more subclasses for players, and Roll20 support. We currently have neither!

Right now, the TotV Player's Guide has 2 subclasses per character class. This is in contrast with D&D 5.5 which manages 4 subclasses per class in the PHB, and also has a tome out on dmsguild.com right now which updates the remaining 69 subclasses out there. So D&D 5.5 has a clear advantage here. Kobold Press has been catching up with ancestry options (well, ancestry and lineages in the parlance of TotV), with two PDF resources out adding a plethora of previous species to the mix, but nothing yet for new subclasses. 

The other thing TotV needs to get adoption rates going (for my group, at least) is Roll20 support. I know they are committed to Shard Tabletop, but last I check Roll20 support was promised and it's for better or worse where many people staked out their VTT gaming ecosystems. I also happen to have TotV set up on Alchemy Tabletop, which is a really cool and weird alternative...and I find both Alchemy and Roll20 more intuitive for myself than Shard....Shard has a great player interface, but does not have the sort of resources I would need as a GM to run games; it seems like it is better designed for pre-published modules. I mean, you can probably run homebrew on it well enough, but honestly my old brain can't figure it out; Roll20's more broadly applicable interface has ruined me a bit.

Anyway, the point is.....Tales of the Valiant is really close to adoption in my group, but as seasoned old players they need more variety in choice than the core books currently offer, and most of my players are not in the habit of manually updating existing 5E stuff to match TotV's conversion requirements, so honestly if someone could just take the time to put out a new book of subclasses or even a conversion document that does the work it would be simply awesome. As GM I do not fret this stuff, I have all I need for the game now, and then some! But for my players? Yeah we need more stuff for them.

As GM though: there's Frog Gods' new Tome of Horrors update which is surprisingly good (it brings in a lot of unusual stuff to BFR/TotV not seen in a while), and Legendary Games has popped out some BFR compatible books as well, including Mythos Monsters, Sea Monsters and some modules. There are other books out already, though maybe not at the ideal pace....and a lot of scenarios, which is not (imo) what TotV needs right now half so much as new subclasses and stuff for players.

So! What I guess I am saying is: TotV can stand on its own two feet if it can ramp up content in a manner consistent with its Big Dog competition. It will forever be the niche game played by D&Ders who are no longer infatuated with WotC, but it can totally own that market....if it can give their largely older, veteran base more material to work with. Just my thoughts!

EDIT: One other thing Tales of the Valiant badly needs: A forum!!! If I want to look for useful Pathfinder 2E advice I can go to Paizo. However there is no unifying forum I am aware of for Tales of the Valiant (I believe they have some sort of Discord but....referring to my prior comments about being an old guy....I find Discord a rough place to have a standardized forum, ime). Right now, if you look for places to talk about TotV, good luck! You mostly get lengthy topics on other forms where people try to talk about TotV and then get trashed by people who dislike it for various petty reasons. So yeah....I really think the Kobolds would benefit from setting up some sort of forum for their product, where fans of the product can actually converse and exchange ideas and content. Just saying. 

....And if I am wrong, and there is a good place for this, can someone point me in the right direction?

D&D 2024 - Multiple Sessions In

 We're multiple game sessions in to using the D&D 2024 PHB and DMG, and I have to say: they work pretty well. We have encountered enough new changes in both rules and working parts to merit considering this a "D&D 5.5" (though of course any other RPG out there would consider this a 6th edition), and it holds its own so far against its immediate competition: Pathfinder 2E Remastered and Tales of the Valiant. Of the two main competitors, Tales of the Valiant has the biggest hurdle, as its selling point is now "modified classic 5E" and will appeal to people who dislike change for its own sake, I suppose? I don't know...I like TotV, but I gotta say....D&D 2024 holds its own just fine. 

Pathfinder 2E Remastered tried hard to divorce itself from the D&D OGLisms that previously defined it, so I suppose its merits as an alternative are that it is "D&D-styled fantasy gaming, without any of the D&D trappings." This is a selling point for some people (along with the more detailed mechanics), but that's destined to be its own niche, and Pathfinder's divorce from the OGL is ultimately going to keep it from having any real potential to grab market share from D&D again. 

I am especially interested in seeing how the next Monster Manual shakes things up now. I am, admittedly, more interested in seeing if D&D 5.5 can maintain this momentum next year. WotC is a monolith in the RPG industry, but people forget that its really Hasbro. Without their owners, WotC would probably be a lot closer in size and scope to Paizo or Kobold Press (well, except for MTG I suppose...)

So if you're wondering where things have shaken out for my groups: we're pretty well sold on D&D 5.5 and it looks like that's where will be at for the duration. I am playing in a TotV game, and I do have a very intermittent PF2E game online which I GM, but for my weekly regulars, we're hip deep in the new 2024 books and enjoying it. 

The Cost of a Hobby - Kickstarter Strategies for the Consuming Backer

 I had a brief exchange with a Kickstarter creator for a product I backed, then a few days later (well before it was ready to close) decided to back out on. He asked why I backed out and I explained the problem from a consumer/backer stance: the product was not overly expensive (about $70 for two books....specifically Dragonbane books for the Lone Wolf setting) and I am interested in it. But a couple issues prompted me to back out: the first being it was scheduled for November 2025, and I have learned, time and again, that backing a Kickstarter you are interested in today does not equate to it being a Kickstarter you will be excited for a year or more from now. That is, of course, assuming the project is not delayed; about 75% of the Kickstarters I have backed are usuallly delayed a few months or even a couple years. 

The second problem I pointed out to him is that when a Kickstarter has a big ask and a distant date, I know its not a project that has effectively started; its a project looking for money to get off the ground. This means there's no written text ready to go, no artist on board yet, no editor, no playtesting. The KS is effectively advertising a concept to backers willing to take a risk on it happening. Other Kickstarters I have backed, the most successful ones (imo) are the ones that have maybe only a couple months to completion after the Kickstarter is done. These are projects which are practically ready to go, and the publisher/author is using KS to build interest and sales before the release, or maybe the bulk of the work is near completion and they just need that last funding push to pay for art/printing or something. These Kickstarters are great - they reflect a commitment ahead of time, and get a product out within the window of interest for the prospective consumer/backer. Examples of this (with kudos) go to D101 Publishing (Newt Newport), Matt Finch with Mythmere and Steve Jackson Games (with their smaller KS's at least).

In any case, the point is that if I'm going to back something, years of backing other Kickstarters have taught me that I need to look for scenarios where the KS is just "the final push" and not "ground zero." Ground zero requires a lot of commitment way down the road, and in a twist, the few publishers I might consider backing are also very good at getting those products out to retail once released so backing the KS becomes more a matter of convenience or solidarity than anything else. Steve Jackson Games, Monte Cook Games and Pinnacle Entertainment are all examples of publishers using Kickstarter to start off products that I know will appear eventually, but the motivation to Kickstart them is low for me because I am confident their product will eventually arrive and be purchasable by me down the road, assuming I am still interested in it. And if it turns out they fail? By not backing I am not out of the product if it fails.

There are a couple other strategies to being a backer to consider. For example, I always look at what the creator has done before; if they have no prior Kickstarters? Unknown risk, don't back it. If they have lots of Kickstarters that seem to be incomplete? Bad sign. As an example....the creator of the Lone Wolf books for Dragonbane seems to have at least one Kickstarter that appears to be 7 years overdue (and people are very pissed about it). Even with my two prior items of logic, this alone is a huge red flag against backing another Kickstarter by the creator, when it is clear they can't finish the existing projects.

Another peeve I have about backing things is unrelated to Kickstarter, but rather its competitors,  Backerkit and other crowdfunding venues. Notice how it is atypical of a creator on those venues to even put a deadline in place? Yeah, that's a deal breaker right there. At least with Kickstarter it requires you to provide a month and year on when to expect project completion. 

Honestly....I'd love to back the Lone Wolf adaptation for Dragonbane for what it is. I just can't reconcile all the risks involved, and based on the creator's prior history, I now realize it is probably destined to be a 2031 release, to go by his other projects.

FIGHTING FANTASY RETURNS!

I didn't mean to type that in Caps, it just happened the cap lock was on at the moment so I went with it. So yeah! Steve Jackson Games (US) is teaming up with the Steve Jackson (UK) and Ian Livingston Fighting Fantasy gamebook properties to bring them back to print! Cool stuff. Read about it here.

My sincere hope is that this could also mean cool new stuff in the future for Advanced Fighting Fantasy, though admittedly it has been kept reasonably well by Arion Games, although the POD versions can at times feel very washed out. Imagine, though, a AFF treatment not unlike what SJG has done for Dungeon Fantasy or The Fantasy Trip....probably not in the works due to licensing issues, but hey, who knows!

The Monthly Blog Post!!! - Cypher System, Tales of the Valiant, Steam Deck OLED and Future Plans

 Wow, I have gone almost a month without bothering to post. In my defense I have had an enormous amount of work going on, and with that a lot of business travel, so time has a way of escaping under such circumstances. Still, I managed to have a bit of fun in the travel (which is all in-state, at least, so not horrible; New Mexico is if nothing else a very pretty region to drive through). 

My highlights this month include finally getting my hand on the Steam Deck OLED edition, which is noticeably an improvement over all the other prior handhelds I have gotten my hands on; enough so that I plan to sell my original Steal Deck and the Asus ROG Ally-- but not the Legion Go! That machine may have crappy battery life but all its other components make up for it. The Steam Deck OLED is not a maor leap, but its noticeably improved battery life (I took a trip from Albuquerque to Carlsbad and did not kill the battery the entire way, even playing games such as Crisis 2 on it), its screen improvement (I am a big fan of OLED screens), and its minor tweaks and improvements all led to the best handheld travel experience I have had so far with a PC handheld. 

This month is so crazy I have gotten almost no gaming in, and have so far had to postpone my live games until the end of the month. I managed to get one of the two campaigns to a decent pause point, where the PCs could rest, recuperate, scheme and also the players could decide what they want to do next. I am all for continuing the campaign which paused at level 14 (D&D 5E) and get them all to level 20 with a final glorious story arc, but I am also keen to try something different, such as Cypher System or Dragonbane. We'll see what happens when we resume gaming around Halloween.

On the Saturday group the story paused one session away from the big resolve, kinda annoying, but we'll get to it eventually. After the plot arc finishes (it[s D&D 5E in the fictitious not-Japan region of the Realms of Chirak setting), we'll see if the group wants to continue or we do something different. I am keen to try Tales of the Valiant, possibly on this night, as a focused campaign using only TotV books for a decently purist experience. My worry is that, since TotV is just a new iteration of D&D 5E, that my group will find that too restraining, as I notice some of them seem to go almost exclusively for weird 3PP stuff they find online these days to make characters, and a couple others in the group are really, really into D&D traditional, so TotV might be one step removed from their comfort zone, simply because it is not a WotC product. So I am unsure if this will really happen or not.

Saturdays have been rough for me as it is, as I've gotten older and had less overall time for things, it has made Saturdays harder for gaming. I have been more or less trying to regulate by doing every other week, but it is possible down the road I may consider other options. The thought crossed my mind that Sundays might be better for gaming....but traditionally I use Sunday as my "home maintenance day" so I'd have to switch that to Saturday if I tried gaming on Sunday. There is also the problem that I bought my house a roughly 30 minute drive from the city, where the group normally meets, and I often find myself a lot less interested in driving on the highway back to the city to run a game. Oh well...it will sort itself out eventually.

I may have my priorities backwards, too. I should consider Cypher System, a ruleset which is better for shortform campaigns of 10-20 sessions at the most, on Saturdays, and propose TotV for Wednesdays. I have a lot of really great Cypher books I have yet to use, as most of my original Cypher campaign time was with 1st edition and not the revised edition. I regret to say that, much as with several other games, the revision did not click as well with me as the original did, so I have only run a couple campaigns in the newer edition. I ran into this same problem with Unknown Armies, where I loved 1st edition but found that the subsequent revisions fell flat for me. Sometimes, that initial rough magic of the original game gets lost in the efforts of the designers to rethink/repackage/reimagine the system for later editions. In Cypher's case it's tolerable....I see why they changed character design the way they did to be cleaner and more generic, but in the process they lost the charm and suggestive flavor of the original's approach. This can be worked around, but it has forever left something behind with the original that made it a better overall evocative experience, in favor of a more organized and mechanically consistent experience....so a trade off, I guess. 

Anyway, this post has served mainly to remind myself that I should be blogging more often. More to come!

Tales of the Valiant Vs. D&D 2024

 Amidst an endless array of personal family turmoil (ranging from family health issues to cat problems to dying cars) I thought I'd take a few minutes to decompress with an innocuous blog post. Specifically, to call out a fine post over on the Kobold Press Blog! This one, in fact.

The Kobolds provide a bit of an overview on why one might consider Tales of the Valiant even in the face of the new D&D 2024. I have heard a lot of interesting feedback on D&D 2024, and one thing I've noticed is that the new rulebook is much likelier to cause consternation and conflict if you are a newer gamer. No one I've talked to who takes umbrage at any level with the new repackaging of the rules has been through the various prior edition changes, notable in particular being 1E to 2E, 2E to 3E, 3E to 3.5E, and the most egregious of all: 3.5E to 4E. That last one was, on a certain level, not a change of editions but a change of game systems, draped in the corpse skin of the game the mimic replaced.

I like to frame it like this: from my jaded ancient gamer perspective, there are about as many notable changes in D&D 2024 to the regular 5E D&D as there were between Call of Cthulhu 5th and 6th edition. Were there changes? Yes. Can you still use everything that came before with what is coming next? Totally. Is the new rules mainly just incentivizing you to buy it by being cooler, offering more options, and packaging everything in a very clean and organized package? Totally.

Tales of the Valiant comes in to this discussion with the idea that it offers what amounts to 90% of the same game, with the last 10% looking darned similar and just being a mess of tweaks and mods for a particular feel and style. It has its own merits, but I really do think I could run a campaign with mixed 5E PHB, 2024 PHB and TotV characters all at the same table, so long as I am clear on which underlying variant of the rules we are all agreeing to abide by. They are that close.

What Tales of the Valiant offers that is different from the new 2024 D&D however is style and character: it's presenting a distinctly Kobold-Pressian representation of adventuring that looks and feels a lot like the D&D I thematically have enjoyed for many years now. It's got a traditional vibe to it that makes it feel different from the newer 2024 D&D, which is so far totally fine but also feels like it is trying too hard to be too many things to too many people at once.

What this all gets down to is that while I rather like the new 2024 PHB, I think I can hold off using it until its two complimentary volumes are out, so I plan to convince my playing group we should give Tales of the Valiant a spin for a few months so we can really grokk the subtleties here. I want to see if the promise that monsters hit harder and the game is a bit tougher is true, because I like that concept space. I also like how TotV does the lineages and heritages, it provides more versatility and flavor, something I feel is a bit weak in the 2024 PHB edition, where it feels like "least troublesome presentation" was the order of the day.

That said.....neither of these systems have half elves or half orcs, and that is just weird. It's one of those moments where you have to ask what curious logic was on display to invalidate the notion of people of mixed race, and what sort of madness percolates under the guise of good intentions to think that somehow such notions had to be expurgated from our fantasy tales?

Ah well.

If I manage to get this off the ground I shall report more soon. 

Post- Session: Player's Handbook 2024 is A Utility Driven 5.25E D&D

 Just a brief follow-up, and this is with the noted caveat that the devil is in the details, but my group last night agreed that the D&D 2025 Player's Handbook is basically a marvel in reorganization and a clear rewrite, but it also appears to be simultaneously far less invasive than we expected in terms of rules changes, and also somehow a bit more so in some very specific cases. The fact that it really does appear to be backwards compatible with no fuss (that is to say, you can run a 2014 character with a gang of 2024 characters and not miss a beat) is helpful. That makes it noteworthy as being less of a hassle than, say, using 3.0 products with 3.5 books back in the day, where there were a lot of discreet structural and design changes to improve mechanical problems. This book is far less about fixing mechanical issues then simply adding new content and revising stuff that will, while not invalidating the older PHB, make your players want the new PHB.

No one in my group had a copy yet, and as it turns out despite getting several boxes of books my FLGS sold all of them on Tuesday, and so no one in my group other than my son and myself had the new PHB yet. Still.....I am sure they will grab it on D&D Beyond or something quick enough, or when the formal non FLGS release hits on the 17th.

By the way, I have gotten over the freakishly friendly smiling phenomenon I was ranting about yesterday. After making such a big deal about it, I began to notice that this is not quite the bother it initially felt like to me.....yes, there are still about 10-15 notable illustrations where I am a bit weirded out at the maniacal joy of the expressions on these character's faces, but a disproportionated number of them appear to all be bards and (weirdly!) druids. So yeah....probably just a "me" problem LOL

Anyway! We already started using the book in actual play to look up stuff like spells and such. We did not find any surprises (yet) but there are some. Healing seems to be buffed up a bit, for one. It is much, much easier to look content up in this edition, so it is already feeling pointless to me to reach for the old PHB unless I really needs to identify some legacy content information, such as on a class that got more heavily revamped, or the poor half orcs and half elves who have lost their identities in this new edition. 

Speaking of half orcs and half elves Is it just me or does that feel like some sort of weird form of discrimination? Was WotC more worried about the kind of questions being half-this and half-that raised, and decided it was better to not raise those questions and hope no one brought up the counter point that in a world where elves, orcs and humans can all apparently interbreed that there will be people of mixed descent? Is this purged because they decided to remove the concept of races and go for species, implying everyone is genetically too different to interbreed? The entire thing feels weird to me, and like there was no right way for them to address this without offending some camp, so they just tried to dodge the entire issue instead. I feel like this is even stranger given they made orcs, as the most contentious example, far more "not evil" in this version, at least according to the lone paragraph of detail they get, which strongly implies that humans, elves and such who have a green muscle mommy fetish (damn you internet for creating these memes) would inevitably lead to even more half orcs in the world, not less. Oh well. It's like 1989 all over again, and no doubt a future book will find a way to delicately address this such that the WotC overlords don't look like they are crapping on people of multiracial descent through their fantasy game analogues.