Tales of the Valiant (Kobold Press)

[Oramac]

Apologies if this is in the wrong spot. It's based on 5e, so I figured this is the best fit.

Has anyone else looked into Kobold Press's Tales of the Valiant (https://www.talesofthevaliant.com/)? I'll admit I like it quite a bit more than what WOTC is doing, and already backed the kickstarter. The playtest preview is pretty damn good, imo.

I just want to see what others think.

[JLandan]

I saw it on kickstarter. It looked pretty cool, but I don't back kickstarters anymore.

[One Tin Soldier]

I got turned off of it by the first packet they showed. Their version of Warcaster, available at first level, was just stupidly powerful. It would basically make it so that no full caster would ever even roll for concentration until Tier 2 play. And none of the other options were even close to that power either. It spoke very poorly of their design skills and/or philosophy.

[Kane0]

Keeping an eye on it just in case theres something worth stealing to incorporate into my 5e brew, much like D&DOne

Edit: given their changes to fighters that they still havent fixed by the preview packet i dont have that much faith, but it could just be my tastes.

[Oramac]

I got turned off of it by the first packet they showed. Their version of Warcaster, available at first level, was just stupidly powerful. It would basically make it so that no full caster would ever even roll for concentration until Tier 2 play. And none of the other options were even close to that power either. It spoke very poorly of their design skills and/or philosophy.

It's a playtest? They took exactly that feedback and changed it to just 8+prof instead of spellcasting DC. Still strong, sure, but writing the whole thing off because of a first draft balance issue that was subsequently changed seems overly harsh.


Keeping an eye on it just in case theres something worth stealing to incorporate into my 5e brew, much like D&DOne

Fair. I'm more likely to do the reverse. Swap over to ToV and then borrow from whatever the hell WOTC does with 5.5 for my ToV games.

[JadedDM]

I've been following it pretty closely. I'm pretty much done with WotC at this point, and have zero interest in 6E. So right now I'm hedging my bets to see how Tales of the Valiant and Daggerheart come out. If I like one, I'll switch to it. If not, I'll probably stick to 5E (which is no big; I played a dead edition for 28 years before this, so I'm pretty used to it).

Some of the changes ToV have made are interesting, but they don't seem to be addressing any of the issues I have with 5E, unfortunately. But we'll see what the final product looks like.

(Also, pretty impressive they made their goal in like half an hour. And are currently 8x over what they asked for, and are almost at 9x, and still have several weeks left. I guess a lot of people are eager to see this succeed.)

[Oramac]

I guess a lot of people are eager to see this succeed.

I readily admit I'm one of those people. lol. But yea, I'm doing the same as you; watching ToV and Daggerheart very closely. Sadly, we have almost no info on Daggerheart at this point.

[Psyren]

It's a bit too safe for me, even compared to OneD&D's relatively incremental approach. Also I dislike things like fixed ASIs and fixed damage from monsters. I'll keep reading the playtests but I think I'll wait until the materials are available on a wiki somewhere before deciding on monetary support.

[Silverblade1234]

Thoroughly unimpressed so far (though I'm following it with interest to see if things dramatically change at some point). I've seen little redeeming creative quality to ToV: it's 85% just 5E, 5% changes from OneDnD, 5% polish from popular homebrew, and 5% original ideas of highly questionable quality. Kobold Press's player options have always been hit-or-miss, and this is just more of the same. At least OneDnD is trying to take a critical look at what worked and didn't about 5E and is trying to make meaningful improvements; ToV is just trying to get free money for little effort from the people who don't want to give money to Wizards anymore. Which is certainly their prerogative, and it's working for them so far (extremely well, by all accounts). I just would have rather seen them develop basically anything else that they're actually good at instead of a museum copy of 5E.

[Brookshw]

I followed the first few playtest packets and moved away when deciding they weren't heading in a direction I was interested in. Ultimately, it's just a 5e clone with some tweaks, nice for some given value but not different enough to inspire me to spend money. I was especially disappointed in the direction of martials, the weapon property stuff was pretty 'meh', and they're repeating the sins of the past. I appreciate that they want to stay 5e compatible (easier to steal D&D players and not have to toss/redo all their old content), I was really hoping they would actually do something completely new and would likely have backed that in a heartbeat (I like a lot of Wolfgang Baur's stuff, very creative guy, but I'm not as impressed or confident in his new designers, especially since Dan Dillion left).

[animorte]

Keeping an eye on it just in case theres something worth stealing to incorporate into my 5e brew, much like D&DOne.
Yeah, something like this. If I can piece together all the various "compatible" sources into something more comfortable, sweet! If not, I've been trying to branch out anyway.

Ultimately, it's just a 5e clone with some tweaks, nice for some given value but not different enough to inspire me to spend money.
The first time I saw it was during an earlier One playtest and shortly after the OGL shenanigans. Somebody mentioned it as a different direction and I specifically called it out for being more of the same thing.

[JadedDM]

Not sure why anyone would be disappointed it's a 5E clone. They were very upfront about that from the beginning, and never claimed it was going to be an original new game.

[Brookshw]

Not sure why anyone would be disappointed it's a 5E clone. They were very upfront about that from the beginning, and never claimed it was going to be an original new game.

Hard disagree on the latter, they were very vocal about breaking away from WoTC after the OGL issue, and repeatedly talked about doing their own new thing. A great many people were shocked to see the first playtest packets and expressed disappointment, enough that Conowitch had to walk their earlier statements back. If you were on their Black Flag Discord, there was plenty of surprise. They were not upfront in anyway about doing a 5e clone.

As to the former, some of their designers are great and have shown some interesting approaches to various mechanics, breaking from 5e would have given them an opportunity to give us something legitimately new, expanding the pool of gaming possibilities/options and, potentially, enabling people to find games that better match their ideal system. Sticking to 5e greatly limits their ability to do so (and, personally, I'm not going to shell out to re-buy what are largely that same books).

[stoutstien]

Neither one or <whatever the end up calling the KP 5e adjacent system> are to my taste. I can already mod 5e for a given table/game with relative ease so I don't need to invest in a different system for just superficial changes.

I do hope the KP system gains some form of following just to get some more players to look beyond the walls of WoTc for content.

[Joe the Rat]

To me it feels like they are headed to Kickstarter a bit early given their current state of the mechanics. I've still got some hope here. I have yet to see how they intend to address Short Rests. If team Wizards is doing a major rework to de-emphasize them, then Team Kobold should address the reasons why.

I still think Rings is the wrong rename for "Spell Level". "I am a Master of 4th Degree Primal Spells" flows better.

[Oramac]

I still think Rings is the wrong rename for "Spell Level". "I am a Master of 4th Degree Primal Spells" flows better.

Eh. I think "Rings" captures the ephemeral and fantastic nature of spellcasting better. I do like the parallel to martial arts in using the word "degree" though.

In truth, I don't think it matters much what they call them, so long as it's not levels. That's the real goal: removing the character level vs spell level confusion (which is very real among non-forum-goers like ourselves).

[One Tin Soldier]

It's a playtest? They took exactly that feedback and changed it to just 8+prof instead of spellcasting DC. Still strong, sure, but writing the whole thing off because of a first draft balance issue that was subsequently changed seems overly harsh.

That change to the number changes nothing. By far the most common concentration save DC is the minimum of 10. The only ways of seeing that number increase are if the DM calls for a higher save DC for an event unrelated to damage (pretty rare IME) or if the character takes 22 or more damage. Most full casters don’t even get that much hp until level 3 or 4 at best. (A level 4 wizard with +2 con will have on average 26 hp.) Until that point, characters with that feat can’t lose concentration from damage unless that damage knocks them unconscious. It effectively removes one of the concentration mechanic’s main balance points, which is just too strong for a feat that any caster can take at level 1.

I’m not saying that this feat alone ruins the game. I’m saying that it is bad game design, of the sort that makes me not want to spend effort keeping track of their work. Which is a shame, because I think that Kobold Press is great at monster design, I use stuff from Tome of Beasts all the time. But the player options they’ve put out in the past have been disappointing, as have their premade adventures and dungeons.

[Kane0]

Anyone else note that their fighter styles all take a bonus action now, and second wind is a reaction under half HP that eats up a hit die? I wouldnt really consider those improvements.

[Psyren]

Anyone else note that their fighter styles all take a bonus action now, and second wind is a reaction under half HP that eats up a hit die? I wouldnt really consider those improvements.

I should download the fighter packet, I could use a laugh...

[Joe the Rat]

Anyone else note that their fighter styles all take a bonus action now, and second wind is a reaction under half HP that eats up a hit die? I wouldnt really consider those improvements.

Also note that the ersatz battle master doesn't have any added damage for maneuvers or stances. I didn't see anything in the base fighter chassis that offset this.
(and made that QUITE clear in my feedback).

[DammitVictor]

Personally... as much as I didn't care for 5e, I'm dying to see the flood of 5e clones that are going to come forth from the OGL debacle.

I missed the Kickstarter, but I'm planning on picking this up at launch.

[Oramac]

Personally... as much as I didn't care for 5e, I'm dying to see the flood of 5e clones that are going to come forth from the OGL debacle.

I missed the Kickstarter, but I'm planning on picking this up at launch.

I'm pretty excited for it. They just release two new playtest packets; one public, the other kickstarter exclusive. I really like about 80% of what they're doing. The other 20% is an even split between "don't care" and "don't like". Which, to me, is pretty darn good.

[AcerbicOrb]

It’s all just a bit uninspiring, isn’t it? It doesn’t seem to have any great vision behind it, or the belief to tackle the weaknesses of 5e - just a clone with a fresh coat of paint.

[Oramac]

It’s all just a bit uninspiring, isn’t it? It doesn’t seem to have any great vision behind it, or the belief to tackle the weaknesses of 5e - just a clone with a fresh coat of paint.

Eh, I wouldn't say that. I think they're trying to tackle some of 5e's issues, though perhaps not all of them. A great example: the two new playtest packets. The one for Kobolds and Smallfolk is an interesting experiment (that will probably fail) in that it's combining Gnomes and Halflings into one race with features that appeal to each.

More to my liking is the new Heritage options (revamped backgrounds) they're introducing, along with the Luck system (revamped inspiration). Also, the kickstarter-exclusive packet is the Druid and Ranger, plus a few spells. It's more in the coat of paint category, but still introduces some interesting new ideas.

The real kicker is, nobody ever really agrees on what "5e's issues" actually are. There's a few things that have a pretty wide consensus, but for the most part the issues are things that people both like and dislike for various reasons.

[Psyren]

The one for Kobolds and Smallfolk is an interesting experiment (that will probably fail) in that it's combining Gnomes and Halflings into one race with features that appeal to each.

...can I ask, why?? What problem is that trying to solve?


More to my liking is the new Heritage options (revamped backgrounds) they're introducing, along with the Luck system (revamped inspiration). Also, the kickstarter-exclusive packet is the Druid and Ranger, plus a few spells. It's more in the coat of paint category, but still introduces some interesting new ideas.

1) What kind of interesting ideas?

2) I would think that if they want as much feedback to iterate on as possible, gating playtest material (especially fundamental game elements like classes) to backers only is a very odd choice.


The real kicker is, nobody ever really agrees on what "5e's issues" actually are. There's a few things that have a pretty wide consensus, but for the most part the issues are things that people both like and dislike for various reasons.

And that's fine, but at the very least they can explain what they consider to be issues like WotC has been. WotC's first pass at the druid had a lot of problems for instance, but at least they set up a camera and said what they felt the problems with 2014 wild shape based on their prior surveys were.

[Oramac]

...can I ask, why?? What problem is that trying to solve?

According to them, Gnomes and Halflings had good flavor, but neither had "a strong mechanical identity". I'm not sure I agree with that, but that's what they said. I'll be putting it in my feedback, in any case.


1) What kind of interesting ideas?

Many of them are more broadly applicable than in normal 5e. I'd compare them to Professions in the Everyday Heroes system (itself a modification of 5e). They give more generally useful features, while remaining on-theme for the fluff.


2) I would think that if they want as much feedback to iterate on as possible, gating playtest material (especially fundamental game elements like classes) to backers only is a very odd choice.

I can't disagree there. I find it odd as well, but I suppose they have to offer something that's kickstarter exclusive. Wouldn't have been my choice, but whatever.


And that's fine, but at the very least they can explain what they consider to be issues like WotC has been. WotC's first pass at the druid had a lot of problems for instance, but at least they set up a camera and said what they felt the problems with 2014 wild shape based on their prior surveys were.

They're not making videos, but they actually started the design notes thing before WOTC did. In their packets it's a sidebar called "Behind the Curtain" and is usually quite detailed (I snipped and paraphrased the one from Smallfolk above).

[Psyren]

Many of them are more broadly applicable than in normal 5e. I'd compare them to Professions in the Everyday Heroes system (itself a modification of 5e). They give more generally useful features, while remaining on-theme for the fluff.

Many of what? I think you missed an opening sentence there.


According to them, Gnomes and Halflings had good flavor, but neither had "a strong mechanical identity". I'm not sure I agree with that, but that's what they said. I'll be putting it in my feedback, in any case.
...
They're not making videos, but they actually started the design notes thing before WOTC did. In their packets it's a sidebar called "Behind the Curtain" and is usually quite detailed (I snipped and paraphrased the one from Smallfolk above).

I would love to know what they based that on and if that's all they said in their sidebars. It's not like they don't have multiple subraces each to draw on...

[Sparky McDibben]

I've really enjoyed watching it develop, even though I think they're leaning a bit too hard in the direction of 4e (which, to be fair, is also a complaint I've had about the WotC playtests).

[Clistenes]

I want to see what they do with the spell lists. I think both 5e and Pathfinder 2 sacrificed too much fun for the sake of balance... I would like to see Teleport, Plane Shift, Demiplane and Simulacrum spells that are actually fun to use ...

[KorvinStarmast]

I want to see what they do with the spell lists. I think both 5e and Pathfinder 2 sacrificed too much fun for the sake of balance... I would like to see Teleport, Plane Shift, Demiplane and Simulacrum spells that are actually fun to use ... I had a good bit of fun with both Plane Shift and Simulacrum in 5e. (I also feel that Demiplane is a spell that needs to go away).

[Oramac]

I want to see what they do with the spell lists. I think both 5e and Pathfinder 2 sacrificed too much fun for the sake of balance... I would like to see Teleport, Plane Shift, Demiplane and Simulacrum spells that are actually fun to use ...

IMO the best thing they did with spell lists was to totally separate rituals from regular spells.

I'm curious, why those spells in particular, though? I've used teleport, plane shift, and simulacrum several times and didn't have any issues with them. Why do you say they're not fun to use in 5e?

[Clistenes]

IMO the best thing they did with spell lists was to totally separate rituals from regular spells.

I'm curious, why those spells in particular, though? I've used teleport, plane shift, and simulacrum several times and didn't have any issues with them. Why do you say they're not fun to use in 5e?

Well, Demiplane is just a glorified closet in 5e, and Simulacrum is too limited; if you want to use simulacra as spies or decoys, you can only use one at a time, and you can't copy anything but humanoids or beasts, so, you can't copy say a pixie or an imp or a troll as part of a scheme...

In Pathfinder 2 Teleport and Plane Shift are useful mostly as emergency escape... no matter what, you always have to walk to your destination, even if you cast Teleport several times (the first time you appear 500 miles from your destination, then you cast it again and arrive 80 miles from your destination, you cast it again and appear 6 miles from your destination...).

As for Pathfinder 2's Create Demiplane Ritual, you need a party of four PC with the right skills, and there is the problem of using Plane Shift to leave the Demiplane and appearing hundred of miles from where you want to be...