The Bloodhunter Class is Causing me Existential Despair

[Unoriginal]

at what points did he set the DC's 'ridiculously high' as you described?

During the fight against the mutated Cambion under the Cathedral, I distinctly remember him setting a DC of at least 15 (maybe more) when the Monk tried to... use the wall to do a cool assisted 5ft-long jump, for flavor.

She failed and he made her land prone.

I'm not 100% sure they were at the level where Monks can literally walk on walls, but they were around that level.

I also recall him denying the Monk the use of said walk-on-walls ability, or at least telling her she needed to do STR (Athletics) check like everyone else in order to get up vertical surfaces.

[stoutstien]

During the fight against the mutated Cambion under the Cathedral, I distinctly remember him setting a DC of at least 15 (maybe more) when the Monk tried to... use the wall to do a cool assisted 5ft-long jump, for flavor.

She failed and he made her land prone.

I'm not 100% sure they were at the level where Monks can literally walk on walls, but they were around that level.

I also recall him denying the Monk the use of said walk-on-walls ability, or at least telling her she needed to do STR (Athletics) check like everyone else in order to get up vertical surfaces.

Yeah I couldn't remember any particular circumstance because I have never watched or listen to it in earnest only in passing but I do recall multiple times where he called for checks/saves when the monks explicit class features are clearly meant to avoid such things.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

The one Blood-Hunter I've seen in play kept almost dying, to the point where she consumed most of our healing resources.

Protip: if your class's main gimmick is taking damage to boost your stuff, maybe don't go with two-weapon fighting while insisting on being a frontliner?

I'm assuming this is from an older version of the Blood Hunter? Because the Most times I'm seeing someone able to take their Hemocraft Damage is 6 Times if you Crimson Rite BOTH weapons and then are level 17 + to use Blood Maledict all 4 times between a rest. Like, I definitely see how Crimson Rite hurts more if you 2-Weapon Fight, but it doesn't seem a lot.

[kazaryu]

During the fight against the mutated Cambion under the Cathedral, I distinctly remember him setting a DC of at least 15 (maybe more) when the Monk tried to... use the wall to do a cool assisted 5ft-long jump, for flavor.

She failed and he made her land prone.

I'm not 100% sure they were at the level where Monks can literally walk on walls, but they were around that level.

I also recall him denying the Monk the use of said walk-on-walls ability, or at least telling her she needed to do STR (Athletics) check like everyone else in order to get up vertical surfaces.

He is an okay DM, lacking as a PC material designer, and above average as an entertainer. Seeing how he's in a position where he is trying to to sell it as an intertwined product that's a much different standard than someone else is just running a game.

He has a decent eye for setting cohesion and story but he lacks the know how with the nuts and bolts of the system.

Yeah I couldn't remember any particular circumstance because I have never watched or listen to it in earnest only in passing but I do recall multiple times where he called for checks/saves when the monks explicit class features are clearly meant to avoid such things.

so...a lot of this seems to be you implying that its the DM's job to remember all of the features that the PC's have? especially when the PC's themselves don't use those abilities often? now i'll grant you that as an extra skill, its nice to have a DM that does know those things, all the minor details. and remembers them when its appropriate. But i'd hardly call that a requisite for being a 'good DM'. and i don't think a DC15 is all that crazy for that type of check (if your player isn't reminding you that they can literally run on walls)...dc15 is medium difficulty, and falling prone is literally the books consequences for falling. My point is that so often people will put greater weight on his faults than his strengths. so like y'all are saying 'ah, he's a decent story tellers and yada, but he's not as strong at the mechanical side, therefore he's not a good DM'. in my eyes, those skills are weighted a same. a good DM leans into their strengths, and produces a fun game for their players...which Matt demonstrably does. a "great" DM might have a strong grasp on all aspects of DMing. but all a good DM needs to do is make their game fun for their players, be that by being able to present complex mechanical challenges (not really Matt's forte) or by creating a strong dramatic tension and a mostly consistent world in which the players feel like they're navigating a real place (Matt's forte).

Not an uncommon problem even for those who are actual employees at WoTC but it doesn't make him immune to criticism of the product that he's attempting to sell.

now don't get me wrong, he absolutely has weaknesses in his play. he obviously doesn't have a complete grasp on the rules (although the jump from S1 to S2 is pretty dramatic. which makes sense since S1 was when they first started 5e). But its also not like he's completely ignorant of the rules either. throughout S2 it was really only a few rules that i saw him get 'wrong' repeatedly. and those are the ones that i'd expect literally any DM struggle with, for one reason or another. things like the BA spell rule, and remembering to do concentration checks. But i didn't see anything that would make me think he was inadequate as a DM. in other words, less than a 'good' DM. maybe we just need to agree to disagree.

As far as Cobalt monk goes, it's worse than the sun soul so that tells you about where it is.

idk...extract aspects is pretty powerful, particularly in a group that is focused on optimization, but also wants to preserve verisimilitude (i.e. don't metagame). many optimized builds will include tools to deal with specialized enemies (that is, enemies that require specialized tactics), or to account for variable resistances (i.e. don't just take fire spells if you're trying to be a damage focused caster), and they just hand wave whether the character would have that knowledge...extract aspects removes that as a question if you can just....know that stuff on a whim. you don't have to worry about doing research as much, and worry about being misled. just let the monk punch and boom. now you know. add in the reaction riposte they get and the feature seems pretty strong. on top of that at level 11 the ability to have multiple reactions in a round?

i get that the subclass is on a monk chasis which has its own struggles. but the subclass itself seems pretty solid to me. you compare it to the sunsoul but...at least cobalt soul's 3rd level feature both directly and indirectly increases combat potential.

[stoutstien]

But wouldn't the level 3 feature have a same impact of SS by removing tension from an encounter by that logic?

Also a 15 DC is high by 5e math. Without proficiency and a relative ability score in the positive it's a crapshoot and unlike other types of rolls they tend to be 1 and done.

Until the given time where a PCs static modifiers are at a higher weight than the die it's still going to be a relatively difficult check regardless of the number.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

As far as Cobalt monk goes, it's worse than the sun soul so that tells you about where it is.

Odd, it's like that's an opinion vs a consensus. Just looking at the color code over on RPG Net I see the Cobalt Soul rated Green. So not as good as Mercy or Long Death but better than Four Elements, Kensei and Sunsoul.

Extract Aspects is rated top tier, Extort and Debilitating Barrage are rated Green. Meanwhile the two low tier abilities, one is rated Low tier because a Monk normally dumps Int and the other because it burns Ki Quickly.

[stoutstien]

Odd, it's like that's an opinion vs a consensus. Just looking at the color code over on RPG Net I see the Cobalt Soul rated Green. So not as good as Mercy or Long Death but better than Four Elements, Kensei and Sunsoul.

Extract Aspects is rated top tier, Extort and Debilitating Barrage are rated Green. Meanwhile the two low tier abilities, one is rated Low tier because a Monk normally dumps Int and the other because it burns Ki Quickly.

Got to be careful with sites like that because they tend to color their opinion based on a particular style of play rather than looking at the full range.

Like they rate the level 3 feature as green but failed to realize that they key off flurry of blow and missed attacks. Now to be fair a lot of monks like to use flurry of blows but when you have low lv features that are tied to ki consumption it really limits them into a set tactic and this isn't a good one. (They overlook this with kensei because they got hung up on the whole weapon image thing but free AC is massive for monks).
This feature is also dependent on the DM basically home brewing a lot. I would say this subclass is stronger at my table because I tend to make a lot of custom NPCs but for tables that run through standard fair type options it's a wall of text that is meaningless besides potentially a reaction attack... Which is gated behind the enemy missing the Monk. No this doesn't work if they actually hit the monk or they attack somebody else. That's a lot of ifs.
Sure they have PD but that's also a bonus action and cost additional Ki. By the time you get in a position one can really leverage this the fight's probably over.

Monks already have a strong use for reactions with deflect missile and slowfall so it's a ok feature as long as it doesn't get them killed trying to proc it.

Extort true is ok. It's actually fairly abusable with certain party combinations. Oh they get select growing expertise in a skill that is a low priority stat. I actually like that feature all n all. I also think that expertise should be used to strengthen lower ability scores but I'm in the minority here.
This is the heart of the subclass and it should come online a lot sooner. there's no reason why the first iteration of this feature cannot start at level three.

Lv 11 is trap adjacent. It seems like a good trade but you have to have a particularly good reason to use it or you are ki dumping and then SS/FoB is still a better return. The only time where I've seen this really shine is in giant focus game where you can use deflect missile repeatedly. Even then I think it feels better than it actually is. Most enemies with half a brain are going to realize that unless the monk is actively threatening them (read SS) it's actually a very bad idea to target them until last.


The capstone is fiddly and fairly low impact because the things that you really want to affect tend to have immunity and by this time the party should have plenty of resources for bypassing any hurdles dealing with damage types. They get empty body one level later.

It has the potential to be really good but it didn't. It doesn't have any real synergy with monks and ki hungry which is the common feature of all the monk subclasses that lag behind.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

Got to be careful with sites like that because they tend to color their opinion based on a particular style of play rather than looking at the full range.

If I was taking them as gospel, absolutely. I'm just pointing out that there's not a consensus on Cobalt Soul being bad any more than there is one on Blood Hunter being bad.

I'm not about to jump on someone for liking or not liking a class, but the idea that it's specifically bad vs just not tuned well for certain play styles is not the same.

I despise the Sorcerer, I'm finally playing one now and struggling already to not change characters, but I certainly recognize that the Sorcerer is powerful and that people like it. I can't imagine playing a Barbarian instead of a Fighter or Paladin or Ranger, but people obviously like it. One of my Darksun game's PCs is a Barbarian and having a blast.

[stoutstien]

If I was taking them as gospel, absolutely. I'm just pointing out that there's not a consensus on Cobalt Soul being bad any more than there is one on Blood Hunter being bad.

I'm not about to jump on someone for liking or not liking a class, but the idea that it's specifically bad vs just not tuned well for certain play styles is not the same.

I despise the Sorcerer, I'm finally playing one now and struggling already to not change characters, but I certainly recognize that the Sorcerer is powerful and that people like it. I can't imagine playing a Barbarian instead of a Fighter or Paladin or Ranger, but people obviously like it. One of my Darksun game's PCs is a Barbarian and having a blast.

The problem isn't that Cobalt soul is objectively bad design it's the whole line up. Chrono wizards are busted because of lack of understanding of a major restricting limitation of spell casting, echo knights is just word salad at its best, gunslingers is a more limited battle master, .. oath of open sea is ok but it's hard to miss with paladin oaths, runechild missed the fact what features a sorcerer has at level 1, hemocraft is ripe for abuse, juggernaut reinforces that barbarian should be avoided, blood hunter is getting there but it's still full of issues.

5e is robust enough that you can get away with some bad design but it doesn't take away from what it is.

[kazaryu]

The problem isn't that Cobalt soul is objectively bad design it's the whole line up.

you've failed to demonstrate that...all of your complaints essentailly amount to 'cobalt soul uses the monk exclusive resource that monks are supposed to use'. yes, extract aspects is keyed off of FoB, but its a direct benefit to them, not an extra cost. and once you've hit a creature with FoB, you get the riposte-lite for free against that creature. it literally increases the efficiency of FoB, much like open hand monks.

Chrono wizards are busted because of lack of understanding of a major restricting limitation of spell casting,

the only feature they have that's remotely 'busted' is convergent futures...which is the subclass capstone. honestly i wish more of the subclasses were on that same level. My only complaint with it is that the amount of overlap it has with portent...but it also comes online a lot late

echo knights is just word salad at its best

this is an entirely meaningless critique. im sorry that someone made a cool ability, and then actually added enough wording to ensure it its intent was easily understood.

, gunslingers is a more limited battle master, ..

this i'll grant you, to an extent. it was also created for a specific character and very early in Matt's 5e career...but even then it still includes some interesting and unique elements. overall im not a huge fan of misfires, but i suppose they make sense given the setting the class was written for.

, and oath of open sea is ok but it's hard to miss with paladin oaths,

this...this isn't even a critique. ok, fair enough.

runechild missed the fact what features a sorcerer has at level 1,

thats hilarious, love it when oversight like that happens. ironically sorcerers can now have sorcery points at level one, but that doesn't actually forgive the oversight.

hemocraft is ripe for abuse,

i'll grant that blood channeling has the theoretical potential to be abused...otoh i can't think of too many spells that would be all that busted...but im not gonna do a deep dive. like yeah you can cast arcane ward essentially for free, but unless you can arrange for your enemy to step on them...idk, feels too niche. im generally fine with it, much like many of wizards own subclasses. i don't necessarily think its the designers responsibility to make abilties 100% abuse proof.

uggernaut reinforces that barbarian should be avoided,

again...what does that even mean? its clera juggernaut is designed with something very specific in mind...how is that bad design? not every class/subclass needs to be universally useful. i like the flavorful nature of it.

blood hunter is getting there but it's still full of issues.

specifically?

But wouldn't the level 3 feature have a same impact of SS by removing tension from an encounter by that logic?

only if your tension relies on the players not knowing what their foe is capable of..but thats pretty cheap tension, and its not like they aren't going to learn it eventually. so..no? the key is to not make it so that any weaknesses they uncover make the monster a pushover., or allow the monster to cover for its weaknesses somehow.
example: recently i ran my players through an adventure against some meenlocks. the PC's manged to deduce the meenlo0cks light sensitivty, which they attempted to exploit by standing in an outward facing circle with a circle of torches around them. So the meenlocks pushed the torches between the PC's legs to create shadows for them to fight/teleport through. Now, the light sources are still there, so the PC's could still try to use them, but the meenlocks still had counterplay.

SS removes the tension because it makes it impossible for the monster to fight back while amping any attack based damage against them and *also* making it more likely that the monk is able to repeat the stun.

Also a 15 DC is high by 5e math. Without proficiency and a relative ability score in the positive it's a crapshoot and unlike other types of rolls they tend to be 1 and done.

at a +0 you have a 25% chance of passing a DC15 check...that is to say an ability check that you have made absolutely no attempt to get better at, or are attempting to learn but have a severe disability...25% (technically 30%). and with as little as a +4 that chance is now 50%. at level 1, an ability that you're at your absolute strongest in (not counting expertise) you can get a +6, which is a 60% chance of success. thats medium difficulty. that means someone that is talented in the field, but only has basic proficiency (i.e. new) can succeed 60% of the time. meanwhile someone with no talent, or training at it, can succeed 30% of the time...idk, that makes sense to me..i mean, as much as linear scaling numbers like that can.

[animorte]

Hey! Now I'll provide some of input on this discussion, especially since the OP has opened up other threads on their character development.

Mercer is genuinely great at establishing a mood and performing as NPCs, but in term of homebrewing, NPC building, encounter building and rule arbitration, he's worse than average.

Essentially, Matthew Mercer is good at the parts of DMing that make for an entertaining viewing experience, which is why Critical Role is so popular, but he's less good at the rest of it. It's not like he's terrible at it - his players generally seem to have fun, which is, at the end of the day, the only metric that actually matters - but I wouldn't generally assume quality from anything he creates (although, credit where it's due, it is, generally, pretty cool, if unbalanced - the kind of thing I would want to build a character around, were it balanced appropriately), or take him to be the standard for DMing.

you may run your fights differently, you may even have a different style of game, thats fine too. but to claim that someone else isn't a good DM just because they run a different style to you is incredibly asinine.

He is an okay DM, lacking as a PC material designer, and above average as an entertainer. Seeing how he's in a position where he is trying to to sell it as an intertwined product that's a much different standard than someone else is just running a game.

He has a decent eye for setting cohesion and story but he lacks the know how with the nuts and bolts of the system. Not an uncommon problem even for those who are actual employees at WoTC but it doesn't make him immune to criticism of the product that he's attempting to sell.

First, dude knows his stuff.

Just knowing the rules isn't enough to be a good DM. He makes room for the "rule of cool" but his specialty is in, you guessed it, acting. He dives into the sounds and voices, that's his area of expertise. Some of NPCs are very popular.

Now, I don't know just how much teamwork goes into his world-building or (sub)class designs. The only thing I really have to say on that is WotC themselves struggle to consistently make balanced and exciting entries. So, if we're comparing to the actual company, he's right on par.

Most importantly, the game is fair and fun. That's the mark of a good DM. Of course, he's far from perfect, but overall he knows what he's doing.

Not to mention, different styles work for different tables. Whatever is fun for your table may be very different from the next.

[Unoriginal]

First, dude knows his stuff.

That video is actually evidence that he *doesn't* know as his stuff as well as people think, and neither do the people who wrote the mistakes to find.

A few that jumps to me watching this video:

1) 5e Pit Fiends can be hurt by silvered weapons. Bonus point for the fact-checker agreeing with Matt saying the silver doesn't work.

2) Neither he nor the people making the questions note that the Pit Fiend would be unable casting a spell then doing a multiattack.

3) He notes the wizard cannot cast a spell and drink a potion, but the wizard did not cast a spell, they used the 6th level subclass ability Benign Transposition. Benign Transposition does not make anyone invisible, either. Once again, the person asking the question declares his explanation to be correct, when it isn't.

4) As the announcer states, it should be assumed there are no magic items beside the ones explicitly mentioned, meaning that the Demilich would be completely immune to the Rogue's damage. Neither he nor the announcer points that out.

There are other points which are more minor, but still would count as mistakes.

Just knowing the rules isn't enough to be a good DM.

True.

He makes room for the "rule of cool" but his specialty is in, you guessed it, acting. He dives into the sounds and voices, that's his area of expertise. Some of NPCs are very popular.

Yes, Mercer is a skilled actor and performer.

Now, I don't know just how much teamwork goes into his world-building or (sub)class designs. The only thing I really have to say on that is WotC themselves struggle to consistently make balanced and exciting entries. So, if we're comparing to the actual company, he's right on par.

His work is generally notably below WotC's already struggling quality control. In term of mechanical viability, I mean.

Most importantly, the game is fair and fun. That's the mark of a good DM. Of course, he's far from perfect, but overall he knows what he's doing.

His games are entertaining to the audience. That is not the same as being fair.

Keep in mind, last year it was admitted Mercer does plan some scenes in advance with the players, to be more dramatic during the episodes.

[animorte]

A few that jumps to me watching this video:

There are other points which are more minor, but still would count as mistakes.

That's fair, but it still stands out in a room with other experienced players/DMs and it's more knowledge than I have claim to.

His work is generally notably below WotC's already struggling quality control. In term of mechanical viability, I mean.

I still think this is a matter of experience and preference, to a certain degree. However, it is not included at my table anyway, so...

His games are entertaining to the audience. That is not the same as being fair.

I completely agree, but the two aren't necessarily on the same scale. Unless you mean, being fair to the audience? The game he runs is mechanically fair to the players, but the game is entertaining to the audience for a variety of reasons.

Keep in mind, last year it was admitted Mercer does plan some scenes in advance with the players, to be more dramatic during the episodes.

Don't you? Introducing a player's new character or figuring out some details around a character is something I love to do as part of the process. Sometimes there is certain information that outright doesn't work if everybody knows about it.

I'm in a campaign right now where I know for a fact at least three of the players are periodically conversing with the DM each with unknown information to the others. It's built in as part of that story.

Chetney's class was introduced in such a way that most of the other players weren't aware. Several other instances with players and their characters are discussed OOC.

I thought this was common.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

Keep in mind, last year it was admitted Mercer does plan some scenes in advance with the players, to be more dramatic during the episodes.

Yeah, let's not go into that "It's not real D&D, it's scripted" rabbit hole.

As Animorte already pointed out, every good DM does this. The examples of scripted and planned with the players things are things like Travis knew Bertrand was "Leaving" and it was, in fact, Travis' idea to set things up that way. Travis didn't know the details or how it would happen, however.

I've found lots of DMs that do that thing frequently.

[Witty Username]

I don't mind bloodhunter, it has some cool ideas and has niche traits.

It is hard to claim a class as good when it killed the first character to use it though.
--
Homebrew that is made to be table specific will have vastly different expectations from anything from other tables or the official books.
Cobalt soul, bloodhunter, gunslinger, that beastmaster rework, etc. All seem to work for that table.

At least no one was allowed to multiclass rogue-rogue. That would be a travesty. Even if it fits the character perfectly. - kidding, and shout out to any that watches Oxventure

[Lokishade]

Yeah, let's not go into that "It's not real D&D, it's scripted" rabbit hole.

As Animorte already pointed out, every good DM does this. The examples of scripted and planned with the players things are things like Travis knew Bertrand was "Leaving" and it was, in fact, Travis' idea to set things up that way. Travis didn't know the details or how it would happen, however.

I've found lots of DMs that do that thing frequently.

I do it all the time with my DM. Whenever the character build I tried doesn't turn out as fun as expected, I talk with my DM how best to retire the current character. Either retire dramatically or go out with a bang in combat. We "plan" things, but during the chaos of an actual game, we always get surprised on how this actually plays out.