Відео

What was that DMs problem? And the rest of the party for that matter? How is it selfish for OP to not wanna be the equivalent of a helpless old lady if you put her in body armor? From OPs perspective he basically played a Visual Novel where the main character is rarely acknowledged.

it felt like class jealousy from the other players, and then you said Warlock and Barbarian and i knew. both can feel so underwhelming as a beginner player. still terrible decisions by the DM and players.

Appeasement worked so well in 1930s Europe

I like how he isn’t like most reactors that stop every 5 seconds to say “WHOAOA BRO WHATTT” and just repeat the same nonesense

26:29 No, this is entirely the GM. If they veiw a single player as "just the side character," they are immediately and entirely the problem.

Reading wasn't great on this one and kinda put me out of the story. Good thing the post is on screen to read because you actually lost me a few times with the way you read sentences. But this story though, sheesh. I'm not sure whether to be more annoyed by the DM who seems like an absolute jerk, or the other players who somehow seem just as bad. I would have just left; screw the story, especially when the DM acts like that about it. At least be nice, not like this. Or, hilariously, retire to become an in game farmer. Enjoy your story now, DM.

stop ruining my sex rp pls

I don't know who hurt the DM. However, if I were OP, then I would have.

As much as I understand the frustrations of the players, is it not possible this DM is new and inexperienced? Taking that thought into account, it makes this whole video akin to harsh criticism. Borderline bullying.

I would have left that table long before Paladin did. Or, I would have done my utmost to try to get my character killed. "It will pay off in the end" is actually not something a DM can know - if a player is upset at how they are treated then nothing can truly make up for almost 10 levels of being worse than a Warrior. If Paladin wanted to play warrior, he would have rolled warrior! (Sorry "Fighter") I think the rest of the players were tone deaf. At first it can be excused due to inexperience - but how can they not see how unfair it is that one player isn't getting anything? How would the barbarian like it if all of his rages were gone? Or the Warlock if their pact patron suddenly decided "no more powers for you!" - at what point can you excuse ignorance? And where should you demand some empathy?

18:30 this dm is wrong because thashas literally has a section about chaning stuff like pacts

To this guys credit, he definitely represened imperial japan accurately, might as well play a nazi at that point

1 or 2 curse items thought out 1 whole campaign at most. And have them be optional if not story related.

I cast vicious mockery and just insult him while still in character

DM: "I'm gonna have them make hard choices" party: *chooses the more efficient yet morally questionable route* DM: *surprised pikachu face* it's the DM's fault for giving them the choice, really. if he wanted them to be good guys, he simply had to host a campaign in which doing good deeds also helped them progress their quest.

The DM takes things too personally. It's always good to remain dispassionate and use all the tools at your disposal. What the DM saw as disrespect could have been a newbie's attempt to play a paladin faithfully. Rather than try to 'humble' anyone seek to understand the players and their respective characters. By taking things personally you will get personal with players,this feeling everyone will pick up on and it destroys campaigns. People play dnd for fun, catharsis and to escape. It can also be a great way to learn life lessons and help friends improve emotionally. Be absolutely immovable when you are the DM, like a good doctor or judge,impersonal,enigmatic and above all dispassionate. When I used to run games I wasn't overly nice to players at all. Everyone but two absolutely loved the games as they were reasonable and fair..but if someone insisted on doing stupid things they suffered or died quickly..and that became part of the greater tapestry and story. Say this idiot of a paladin helps hold the line,does pretty well before doing something reckless or stupid. Then gets killed. Everytime we return to this valley it's now known as 'Tormond's folly'. If the player chooses to return as another character it serves to remind them the their choices have both meaning and consequence.

genuinely thought this was one of my old friends who basically did the same thing -making us be as op as we want -Genuinely just going on pinterest and trying to fit ANYTHING he found cool into the lore -making himself "the cool wise sage" or something -this campaign was supposed to last YEARS -and probably one of the worst offenses were that revives were just very easy and casual eliminating all stakes

I've taken away features and stuff from players before, BUT I try to make it a direct consequence of an action that they knew would have repercussions. I also intentionally make it a feature that is meaningful to their character but isn't debilitating mechanically, like disabling Warlock's ability to cast Find Familiar and banishing said familiar for indulging in an uncharacteristically charitable boost to the Warlock's power set, which I had warned would likely have a consequence later down the line. each member of the party was given a boon for a boss fight, with part of the fight's mechanics being weighing if it's worth while using their boons in exchange for some form of drawback later earlier in the same campaign a player got a bit pally with the BBEG (out of character the player knew what they were doing, their character didn't) who granted them a boon that initially gave them some minor buffs, but over time the boon would get stronger but start having increasingly worse side effects the more they indulged the benefits of said boon - I later learned the player was growing to dislike their character and was looking for an out, if I'd known at the time I'd have made the initial ramp up of side effects more severe, or brought up another excuse for them to leave and swap characters I think a good thing to do is discuss with your players what elements of their characters they enjoy, and what they like less. get a feel for what's important to both them and their character, and make informed decisions based on that. Depending on the player you might want to occasionally reduce the effectiveness of one ability to let another part shine, or put focus onto a less-used feature by putting them in a situation that is perfect for said feature to get extra use. Don't take away so much from the player that they feel useless or underpowered, and certainly don't take away their favourite features or features core to their build. and if you are going to take away features you really should make sure there's loads of prior warning, give the players control to avoid it, and have a clear path to recovering said plan! for the aforementioned Warlock's familiar, I had a mini session where her familiar (and a bunch of other similarly trapped familiars portrayed by the other players) worked together to escape the dimensional prison they were being held in as a sort of side quest, it was a lot of fun and it gave the players some new contacts in the forms of grateful spellcasters reunited with their familiars I won't pretend to be some perfect example of DMing (I've blundered just as much as I've succeeded if not more) and I know I've done some questionable things... like after a boss fight became a walk in the park due to the Cleric casting Hold Person, I made a bunch of future humanoid enemies immune to the Paralyzed condition in some way and with no way to counter it

Critcrab I'm gonna need you to return your internet license for this tag. It will not be reinstated

I wanna find op and invite him to one of my games

The sexual stuff was way too far but the seething over the fantasy racism against an orc is cringe

16:50 Anyone else thinking this is a good tableflip moment? I mean, c'mon! 17:25 There, right there, thats game over for me. Hard game over. And I'd very loudly state exactly why when I walk out. Such BS.

My last dm had a great example of doing a plot twist tied to a player bg. My character had an ex lover turned best friend named Anrhea (Anri for short). My character's starting motive was that Anri had gone missing and I was looking for her. I assumed that we would find her in some dungeon and either need to save or, or get to work with her (I implied in my badkstory that she was a competent fighter and aspiring cleric). Instead we found her working as the BBEG's right hand woman! A large part of the rest of my personal plot was trying to figure out why she was working with him and whether she was being controlled/coerced, had genuinely turned evil, or was pulling a Raine Whispers.

shows again that the tyrants just tear everything apart if you give them the reins

It kinda sounds like the DM was trying to make the paladin like the character from the Vox Machina show, I can't remember her name but she lost her power as well

the pizza analogy doesn't work here at all you're implying that he *knew* the pizza would have pepperoni before chipping in to buy it, but that's not the case here the guy paid good money and had a certain expectation that any reasonable person would have as well it'd be like if everyone said they were going to chip in to buy a plain cheese pizza, but then when it arrives it turns out the guy that made the call secretly ordered anchovies on the pizza anyone would be completely in the right to demand their money back

welcome to a crap guide to reviewign d and d

The onlyu reason I have a DMPC is for comic relief. I roll for every of their actions, they are on par or lesser than my PCs and they are a tool for the players to use. I don't get this taking the limelight from players, you already have the limelight, you're the entire fucking world your players play in.

Eight....sessions...who would put up with this crap for eight sessions? The players are almost as bad as the DM, I would not have tolerated one session like that, its insane.

the campaign I'm in had our party sent into a theoretically unwinnable fight to come back as undead for a halloween """one-shot""" (our DM is very passionate about his writing. it was still connected to the main campaign, just a different tone to it) what he did differently was he designed the fight to simply be a bit higher than we reasonably could handle at the time, solidly within deadly difficulty. He even admitted months later that it was in fact possible to survive the planned TPK fight, and that we had gotten a lot closer to doing so than he thought we would have. Our new temporary character sheets were also a level or 2 stronger than our actual characters were, so we would have had a really tough time without our fun little leveled up toys to mess with if we had survived that fight, but either way, we still had agency in the fight despite the fact that he planned for us to lose the fight

"4 on 1 they should win easily." Oh....oh my god.

This DM and problem woukd last in my Party. Three of us are DM's and 3 of our guys are optimally built

actual stages stage 1 ssso guyss t this is my character his name is Jugar The Strong and he is a dwarven barbarian stage 2 hi so this is Eomen , wizard of the ancient tribe. He uses necromancy and also spreads ilnesses everywhere stage 3 this is Bob. Bob is a farmer with a pitchfork and he loves meas stage 4 this is doctor Poopyhead and he is a literal reanimated hand walking around and tingling enemies to death

The problem is not that the DM doesn't like paladins or bans them from their table; it's that they refused to disclose that to OP in the first place

Ugh, I have a really horrible GM story, one that would probably break your soul to shards CritCrab, but it isn't a D&D game 😢

Is there anywhere in this comment section where I can find ladies of ill repute

An evil Vecna means a good Vecna?? When did this dlc drop?

"We discussed among ourselves if we're supposed to run or fight" that right there would be a signal to a good DM that they'd messed up - the players aren't discussing whether to run or fight, they're discussing which one they're *SUPPOSED* to do.

I remember leaving a comment saying, "All aboard the Crazy Train. Let the railroading begin!", or something of the like

So, I played a Bard once. I got ahold of a legendary instrument. Soon after, I was unable to speak. At all. _BUT!_ I got a magic item that could write in the air, and I had Mage Hand. Thus, I could easily communicate by making airborne neon signs. Not only that, but said instrument had the property that I could use vocal component spells without being able to speak. Furthermore, we were all given magic cards that, when attuned to, let us psychically communicate with one another via telepathy. So while I was miffed, I was still as useful as I was, and I could still play my character fairly closely to how I wanted. And this was with a DM I later left for being a jackass to me out of game! This guy? This DM? Fuck him. Hard. So hard. I hope the other players hear/read this story and dump the asshole, as well as maybe try to reach out to OP to tell them sorry for being idiots.

Intellectual property theft does not exist. Intellectual property is not property and therefore cannot be stolen. Intellectual property is a synonym for monopoly. If I have a monopoly on apples and you produce your own apples in your own backyard then you are not guilty of theft but of monopoly infringement. If I have a monopoly on a character and you produce your own version of that character in your own story then you are not guilty of theft but of monopoly infringement. I know the term is confusing, but intellectual property has nothing to do with property law and everything with monopoly law.

I feel like if you don’t want them to be able to beat it with a nat 20 then don’t give them a roll. I always saw a nat 20 as getting to do what you planned without fail

This is an ancient post, did you reupload this video or remade it?

The sad thing is that this was actually a pretty interesting storyline.

Stories like this are exactly why I consider "planning a major plot twist before the story has even started" to be a major red flag. DM was so excited to have that twist happen that he got mad when the players actually engaged with the world. ...but also, the plot twist was "you all die and now serve the villain as undead monsters"? I would be so annoyed if I found out that the DM was planning an unavoidable TPK before the game even started.

Rat must have been an Andrew Tate fewfan

>Session Zero Instant red flag

We really need more context to say whether or not this is an actual dick move. I could picture a few ways this would make sense. For example stealing the wish from a god, especially if it was "a little too easy" or something could totally justify a wish not working as intended. The rules of d&d aren't really even rules so much as guidelines. Why is "just don't make people feel like crap" such a hard tightrope to walk for so many people?

She was a problem player ofc but I can't see her fitting the Mary Sue archetype description

So for those who wants to share. When is it okay to do what your character would do?