ToV Sell Me on Tales of the Valiant

[Mekri]

Hate to say it but you're going on some really old information. Yes it's very similar to 5e at it's core, but just in the last year has added a significant amount of additional books that have made the game feel and play differently. There's more movement, Subclasses are much less "generic" and have a lot more of a specific flavor to them. Yes adding more books is to make money, but it's also to shape the game into something that is much more unique. The Monster Vault 2, Game Masters Guide, all the Campaign Builders, the upcoming Players Guide 2, Book of Blades, etc have all created a much fuller experience and far less "bland" 5e flavor.


Character building is significantly different though, particularly the lineage, heritage, background, talent system is more robust than 5e '14/'24.

Not old- but core.
My assessment is based primarily on the three main books. I never assume anytime is going to pick up all the optional material.
If some one is playing adnd 2e, I assume the core three books. Not the hole complete class books, etc. that can be over a dozen books.
I would dearly hope anything TOV put out after the core wasn’t just a reprint / rebrand of what another company did.

 

[fettpett]

Are there any high level adventures or other resources for ToV?

Highest level adventure at the moment is like level 8 with the Labyrinth Adventure

 

[fettpett]

Not old- but core.
My assessment is based primarily on the three main books. I never assume anytime is going to pick up all the optional material.
If some one is playing adnd 2e, I assume the core three books. Not the hole complete class books, etc. that can be over a dozen books.
I would dearly hope anything TOV put out after the core wasn’t just a reprint / rebrand of what another company did.

Even going off of that, there are some mark and significant changes that either streamline some things, are better experience overall (Warlock, Ranger) or are just brand new (Mechanist, Lineage/heritage/talents) or are significantly better than w/e WotC wrote (subclasses, backgrounds, Luck, statblocks).

 

[Raunalyn]

I've been running ToV for a while now...over a year, I think. The group is close to 19th level. ToV has a lot of nice things my players like. All of them are veteran D&D players, so I like getting their input.

The party consists of a Fighter, a Barbarian, a Bard, a Monk/Cleric, and a Wild Sorcerer.

The Fighter is, but far, the biggest damage dealer...with his combination of Talents (feats) and weapon mastery, he can dish out an incredible number of attacks and damage...moreso than anyone else in the party.

The Barbarian also can dish out some insane damage...and take an insane amount of punishment.

The Wild Sorcerer is by far the most entertaining. There has been more than one occasion that he has saved the entire party by a random Wild Surge popping up. When they were lower level, they were surrounded by a large number of enemies, and they had an enemy wizard that could cast fireball...almost all of the party was near death, and the Sorcerer rolled a wild surge...it teleported the entire party a mile away so that they could escape. Glorious. But the group also knows to get away from the Sorcerer when he starts casting spells...something I have used against the party many times.

The Cleric is also a big damage dealer...they are a light cleric, and their channel divinity can dish out a lot of damage...a better fireball than a normal wizard's that is party friendly. Not only that...he can use it on any of his light sources as long as the light source is on the same plane of existence.

The Bard is less unique...it's very very similar to the 5e Bard.

I don't have a mechanist in the party (though several players really want to play one in my next campaign), but it reads and "feels" better to me than the 5e Artificer...for some reason, the Artificer just didn't feel right to me. The mechanist seems more robust and balanced.

Mechanically, the Luck mechanic is, to me, more robust than Inspiration. You miss attacks or saves, you gain luck. It's turned a miss into a hit quite a few times at my table.

Monsters are the strongest part of ToV in my opinion. They are tougher, and each have something different they can do that will surprise players who are familiar with all of the standard 5e monsters, and the design feels closer to what the 5e CR mechanic was trying to accomplish. This is echoed in the Gamemaster's Guide with how they design new monsters there.

Enter the Labyrinth is the first supplement. For the most part, it's pretty good, and I like many of the subclasses. However, many of the new spells they have listed in there are extremely overpowered, so be warned if you use it.

There's going to be a Player's Guide 2 coming soon with more subclasses, so I am looking forward to it.

Overall, I like it more than 5e...I don't have 2024 at this time, so can't compare it to that.

 

[Reynard]

Monsters are the strongest part of ToV in my opinion. They are tougher, and each have something different they can do that will surprise players who are familiar with all of the standard 5e monsters, and the design feels closer to what the 5e CR mechanic was trying to accomplish. This is echoed in the Gamemaster's Guide with how they design new monsters there.

I bought the ToV Monster Vault and I usually choose the ToV version over the D&D version when I am running (and sometimes use the A5E version). I almost never use the MM2024 version.

 

[Raunalyn]

I bought the ToV Monster Vault and I usually choose the ToV version over the D&D version when I am running (and sometimes use the A5E version). I almost never use the MM2024 version.

The biggest challenge I have right now is making the encounters challenging for the party; this is a problem that is common between all versions of D&D, in my opinion. It feels easier in ToV, though...the monsters tend to give the group enough of a challenge that they are using resources at a reasonable rate. And, again...a lot of times, the party leaves the Wild Sorcerer by himself to avoid the wild surges, which isolates him and lets me effectively focus fire. They know this is what I am doing, too, but can't seem to stop themselves from doing it.

 

[...m...]

Not old- but core.
My assessment is based primarily on the three main books. I never assume anytime is going to pick up all the optional material.
If some one is playing adnd 2e, I assume the core three books. Not the hole complete class books, etc. that can be over a dozen books.
I would dearly hope anything TOV put out after the core wasn’t just a reprint / rebrand of what another company did.

...for tales of the valiant, the players' guide is the only "core" book by that metric: it's the complete game, although you're doing it a disservice without the additional creatures + encounter-building material from the monster vault...

...tales of the valiant really embraces the modularity of the fifth-edition ecosystem, though, so all five books (PG 1+2, MV 1+2, GG) work well together without proving essential and also include guidelines to trivially adapt material from other 5E publications, as well...all the other kobold press books (the campaign builders, book of magic, book of blades, tomes of beasts, and of course the various campaign sourcebooks + adventures) count among that greater 5E ecosystem but aren't at all analagous to TSR's menagerie of second-edition PHBR booklets...

 

[Raunalyn]

Reviving the thread a little;

I'm up to 20th level for the group...party is about to end the campaign within the next two weeks.

The Fighter and Barbarian are consistently the biggest damage dealers in the group. The Fighter is consistently the biggest damage dealer, with the Barbarian being a close second when he does spike damage from crits.

Prepping for higher levels is simpler in ToV than it is in 5e; the CR mechanics seem more in line with the party's power level.

The spellcasters in the group have some legitimate complaints...and I think this is consistent in 5e/2024 as well. The spellcasters have a huge issue with the Legendary Saves mechanics for Legendary creatures. They feel handcuffed...they unleash a big spell, and their target chooses to auto-save. The sorcerer doesn't complain about this much...he Hastes and buffs the Fighter and Barbarian and turns them loose, but the Cleric and Bard feel like they aren't contributing.

Not sure what to do about this, to be honest. I think the Legendary Saves mechanic is necessary, otherwise boss monsters and solos would go down way too fast and not be challenging.

One thing I'm considering is using Doom (a mechanic in the Monster Vault that can force players to roll disadvantage on saving throws, or give monsters free recharges, or advantage on an attack) and tying that to Legendary Saves. While higher level Solos would get more Legendary Saves, they would need to strategize using them; either they make the Saves, or they use the Doom points for their other functions.

 

[Reynard]

The spellcasters in the group have some legitimate complaints...and I think this is consistent in 5e/2024 as well. The spellcasters have a huge issue with the Legendary Saves mechanics for Legendary creatures. They feel handcuffed...they unleash a big spell, and their target chooses to auto-save.

Tell them to unleash a barrage of lower level spells like command and other save or suck spells. Either they end up contributing, or they eat away at LR until they can unleash hell.

 

[Distracted DM]

Reviving the thread a little;

I'm up to 20th level for the group...party is about to end the campaign within the next two weeks.

The Fighter and Barbarian are consistently the biggest damage dealers in the group. The Fighter is consistently the biggest damage dealer, with the Barbarian being a close second when he does spike damage from crits.

Prepping for higher levels is simpler in ToV than it is in 5e; the CR mechanics seem more in line with the party's power level.

The spellcasters in the group have some legitimate complaints...and I think this is consistent in 5e/2024 as well. The spellcasters have a huge issue with the Legendary Saves mechanics for Legendary creatures. They feel handcuffed...they unleash a big spell, and their target chooses to auto-save. The sorcerer doesn't complain about this much...he Hastes and buffs the Fighter and Barbarian and turns them loose, but the Cleric and Bard feel like they aren't contributing.

Not sure what to do about this, to be honest. I think the Legendary Saves mechanic is necessary, otherwise boss monsters and solos would go down way too fast and not be challenging.

One thing I'm considering is using Doom (a mechanic in the Monster Vault that can force players to roll disadvantage on saving throws, or give monsters free recharges, or advantage on an attack) and tying that to Legendary Saves. While higher level Solos would get more Legendary Saves, they would need to strategize using them; either they make the Saves, or they use the Doom points for their other functions.

The best advice I can give re: legendary saves is to riff on what A5E did: when the baddie uses a legendary save, they pay for it in some way. If the dragon's breath caused a wall of fire, the wall ends when they use their legendary. If the lich has arcane runes of protection vs a variety of attacks, one of them winks out when a legendary is popped. If the giant lord has someone in his grip, he drops them when he uses a legendary.

OTOH in high-level A5E, I ran into trouble with this method because A5E martials can pull out so many boss fight-ending effects almost every round that ending the boss' extra effects when legendaries were used was basically unnecessary.. and the berserker would burn through boss legendaries so fast that the wizard could actually use their magics without fear of legendary saves