Hi there. I'm the Paladin in the group. Praise Be To Biff. I want to thank you for posting this. I'm guessing our GM submitted the story to you, but the saddest thing for me was how long it took for him to be okay with what happened. He has since run games which I continue to play in, and he's a player in a few of mine, but whenever we (Sorcerer and I) make an in-joke about Rogue 1 & 2 OP still groans a little. I remember the argument about Biff & the Dragon very clearly because at one point I interjected, pointing out that in fairness if it wasn't for Biff, this would have been a TPK and at least this way we get to continue. The Rogues disagreed, stating explicitly that they would prefer the campaign to end there and then with a TPK than for Biff to save us. That speaks volumes of how little they care for the future of the campaign, or indeed the concerns of the other two players (myself and Sorcerer). It became clear throughout the in-game tirades and the abuse OP got over Discord that these brats had zero interest in mediation or OP's attempts to improve things for them. They just wanted to tear chunks out of him at the end of every game for the last few sessions. If I have a criticism for the OP, it's that he gave them far, far more chances and "benefits of the doubt" than they ever deserved. Incidentally: Our running joke is "Praise Be To Biff". There's a small roadside chapel easter egg in one of my campaigns in which two Rogues worshipping a little-known Deity. Just our little nod to make light of what at the time was a really horrible situation.

@buggie_plant

8 ай бұрын

PRAISE BE TO BIFF!

@doo_lissdu_lighost6133

8 ай бұрын

Thank you for sharing this with us, brave Paladin. Praise be to Biff, Slayer of Dragons and Brats!

@apocryphgaming9995

8 ай бұрын

@@doo_lissdu_lighost6133 "Slayer of Dragons and Brats" made me spit out my drink! 😂 Thank you, and you're welcome.

@pensandshakers

6 ай бұрын

PRAISE TO BIFF!

@gator-aidan9839

4 ай бұрын

Praise Be To Biff.

The Rogues complaining that they don't know ahead of time what ability every single enemy has makes me laugh because they're basically demanding that the DM allow them to metagame.

@kaylawoodbury2308

9 ай бұрын

As much as I love games like Balders Gate 3, Skyrim and Dragon Age, it's always telling when you get someone from those games trying to play d&d the same way. Wanting all the enemies information so they can make the best decisions, acting self important and main character ish, ignoring anything they think is irrelevant to them, complaining when the game doesn't go their way and they can't just cheat or reset to make it, press X to win mentality.

"I have refused to tell the gm things that I deem to be important components of my backstory and will be a nuisance when my backstory is not explored." Cool man.

This is why the Rouges have never found a "Good Group".

@marybdrake1472

9 ай бұрын

Indeed David, right you are. No one will ever find a "good group" by acting like that.

@tarotsushima3332

9 ай бұрын

There's barely any bigger red flag in these scenarios like "Every single group I come across doesn't keep me around for long." And barely any context as to why that is. No one is going to deal with such behaviour and OP was way nicer than they should have been

I'd be willing to bet money that if the party was TPKed, the rogues would have complained that the DMPC didn't attack the boss.

@ArcCaravan

9 ай бұрын

I bet they'd complain if even one of them rogues were killed.

The rogues refusing to tell _the DM_ their backstories and then later demanding that their backstories be incorporated is just stupid. Those two brothers should just stick to cRPGs.

Words of Wisdom I would like to share with the rouges; There comes a time when being told to "SHUT THE FUCK UP!" is no longer being rude and becomes life advice! 😤

Those two rogues thought they were playing D&D As in, Debates & Dickheads

The biggest tell the rogues are dodge rather then genuinely expressing concern (besides the rudeness and slurs) is that their complaints only pertained to THEM never to treatment of other players, instead they called the other players yes men. They sound like they suck to play with

@ArcCaravan

9 ай бұрын

Good observation, shows they prioritized their personal experience instead of the group.

@Leshantra

9 ай бұрын

If everyone else seems to be the problem, it may be, that you are the problem. But I guess, since they had each other to back them up, it didn't cross their mind, that everyone else wasn't on their side.

“Basically gaslighting”?! Crispy this is textbook gaslighting! I would even throw in a smidgeon of narcissism with the absolute self importance those Rogues had with their diatribe at the end of the campaign, their convenient memory loss on the things that were agreed on as a group, all the way up to a point where OP was questioning their own ability to run the game. It may not be definitive but I would argue there is a strong case here for those rogues. Having said that, that was a wild story. Glad OP is doing better now.

@ArcCaravan

9 ай бұрын

It makes me wonder why the rogues didn't just say the original agreed plan isn't working out for them or vote to skip to the next part like the DM offered. Almost like they wanted an excuse to feel slighted so they can "call out" someone. It's not like anything implied they're unwilling to possibly do something against the new players' wishes.

@ohlookabee8615

9 ай бұрын

​@@ArcCaravanthis is exactly whats most likely going on. most people who act like this will find any reason they can to feel superior to others. in this case, its not bringing up their grievances with the gm and even making stuff up so they have an excuse to bombard gm with insults and blame

It sounds like the Rogues have an echo chamber just for them. Basically, every time they're offline or away from the group they probably talk to each other about their backstories, plans and grievances, then forget that only they are privvy to said backstories, plans and grievances. It also allows them to theory-craft the worst possible intentions the DM might have in private, then echo that between each other until the final distortion becomes their ingrained truth. And as with any echo chamber, how can they be wrong when they have someone who agrees with them completely? Surely it is the evil DM that is wrong and turning the other players against them! So yeah, gaslighting is happening here, but whether the Rogues are doing it intentionally to the DM or unintentionally to themselves is the question.

Good on Crispy for catching himself on blaming the DM too much in the conclusion, particularly saying the story messed with him too. Prevented a case of OP getting blamed just for admitting they could have done their part in the story better.

Kinda toxic? These two were nuclear waste levels of poison.

How dare you ignore my deep and tragic backstory that I never gave you or explained in any way in and out of character?!

On the subject of NPCs getting the last hit on a major boss i actually had this situation happen a few months ago. The party was fighting one of the big bads generals for an important macguffin. The barbarian had just landed a massive hit reducing the boss to about 3-4 HP. I accidentally let it slip that the boss was 1 hit away from death, and in the roll 20 turn tracker everyone could see that the person next in initiative was a mouse knight the party adopted at the beginning of the game "annadora" (this was a game using the humblewood races) I asked the barbarian if they wanted the final blow and he flat out told me no, he wanted the mouse to have it. The artificer actually started cheering her on in the background. So the mouse NPC got the last hit on the bad guy and the players characters cheered her on. As they put it "sometimes it's fun to be sam instead of frodo" (It also probably didn't hurt the party thought she was adorable)

@ArcCaravan

9 ай бұрын

I can definitely see the distinction between your story and the videos, a party's adopted NPC they cared about compared to a (rather well done) DMPC built as a backup party member. I've seen a few important enemies in tabletop games beaten by NPCs rather than players with reasons like a cutscene using something the party were crucial for building, a hyped antagonist that came after a satisfying climactic fight just for the players, a miscalculation for a massive fight, or keeping the party alive instead of allowing an unlucky TPK. There's ways it can work just as much as there's ways it can fail.

That magic sword looks like a normal sword but when it hits is different... cause its FREAKING MAGIC !

No wonder those rogues couldn't find a group. No one wants them for good reason.

Well golly gee, I wonder why the rogues had such a hard time finding games. They seem like such fantastic people. So open and thoughtful. Seriously though, I feel for this DM because I know people like that. People who, no matter how wrong they are will argue to the last breath to get their way. The people who make you hate the things you love, make you feel like a failure at the things you're good at, and just drain all the fun and hope from everything they touch. Talk about sad. And, in all this, I'm completely sure they learned absolutely nothing.

That GM has the patience of a saint. Those rogues don't know how good they had it.

I would personally like to see how op built Biff the understudy. I could use something like that in future campaigns if the party was ok with it

With that final story, did my last problem player get married to another toxic player? Because mine used to do those exact same things no matter how many times I tried to clarify a setting, a rule, or a class ability. The first time he had to miss a session I cried tears of joy; everything went so smoothly because the table wasn't bogged down with a usual 20-45 minute argument.

@ragingdevi

9 ай бұрын

The bizarre relief of having a Problem Player not showing up and being so happy they're not there... ...and then two seconds later going "Am I a bad person?" (And then they destroy the game a few weeks later and you realize: no, you're just perceptive)

@pLanetstarBerry

9 ай бұрын

@ragingdevi I just have to keep reminding myself that this is the same player who would also make fun of the maps I drew, mock me for having to substitute minis, complain that we weren't playing pathfinder, would have a meltdown if I homebrewed anything (even if it benefited the players), and at the tail end of the group being together he would get drunk during the sessions. We couldn't kick him because he hosted and we ran out of other options. The one time he couldn't make it, we got lucky and another player was able to host that night (but only that night). Technically, the pandemic killed that campaign, but I was looking for every excuse to pull the plug on it. "No dnd is better than bad dnd" is a hard lesson to relearn, but another lesson I learned from that it that the DM's fun matters just as much as the players.

Just an idea, based on the problem duo playing siblings, having the exact same complaints, and refusal to join voice chat: there's one player piloting two accounts, using the same classes so they wont slip up and use the wrong abilities.

@ArcCaravan

9 ай бұрын

Fascinating theory.

Wow, but those rogues live in their own little world, don't they?

I seriously love Biff, you can make u some kind of lore explanation for him. Maybe that the party is tied to a "home teleport" spell tied to the party, if any of them "need to rest" they cn teleport to the town and Biff could be said to be a magic infused entity that barely talks, has no personality, but is tied to the part and can mimic some of the ability of the missing party member. SOmething like this in ingenious, not exactly liek what I just said, but there's an option for you guys in your games. SImply put an NPC who takes the place of a missing player, allows the party to keep playing ad not e lacking in thier pary's roles, it means they don't have to cancel D&D night just because 1 person couldn't be there. And holy crap I'm getting irritated allready with this "rules lawyer." Dude literally spent 45 fucking minutes arguing with the DM over if something really was a "balcony", ok the DM maybe made a mistake, get over it and move on. Seriously you're just wasting everyone else's time, time everyone graciously decided to dedicate to this game, to spend with friends, every minute for these games is important. I don't play DND myself nor plan to, but I've learned enough to understand the general social aspects of it. It pisses me off hearing these stories of people just having un with this honestly hard to do hobby, from the DM's days of preperation, to the balancing of stayign on track with the story vs player choice, to how hard it can be for people to even bother to MAKE TIME for this, often it's 1 or 2 times a week or even less. And even then you're having to trutst the DM's skill to give th party a good experiance so you don't feel like your time was a waste, and I even feel the anger and frustration when the game is ruined by a bad DM, or 1 or a few players who do things that either brea the story, or result in the game ending poorly. I honestly now respect DND players, it's hard to do this hobby and I now see all the shit that could easily go wrong.

I love your little skits during the read throughs. You never fail to make me laugh

I'm a naturally quiet person, but I'm not rude about it when I do talk. I prefer playing online because I find using the text chat easier than verbal communication and I got permission from the DM of my current campaign to use text communication to make sure that I wasn't inconveniencing anyone.

People like these need a dm that can read minds because they won't voice their thoughts.

I've been guilty of arguing for minuets on end because of descriptions I misunderstood... We play RP heavy campaigns and when the stakes are too big and misunderstandings make me feel like I played like a dumbass I tend to get too emotional I can get pretty extreme with these, I do my best to calm down now that I am fully aware of the issue ^^" We are human and make mistakes, but we have to own up to them. When you fuck up, make sure to apologize properly and work on bettering yourself !

Not only did the player not explain their chaacter's backstory but it was kinda toxic.

Those rogues were just the worst. Not thought or consideration for other what so ever.

That first story and first skit- one thats my favorite kinda skit but can't place why, two, GOSH what the heck was his problem? I'm glad he wasn't a disturbancebut mate thats when to take a step back to breathe and sort yourself out. Then stay in a game where y'barely participate!!!

Rules lawyering when you don't even know the rules sure is... something.

I'd bet the rogues talked about all the problems they had with each other for months then just assumed the DM knew about them. As described, they seem very self-focused and unconcerned with anyone else's point of view. You can see that most clearly by the repeated complaints that Biff was built using options they didn't have but no suggestion of how to fix it (realistically Biff's build was just an excuse to have 1 NPC backup instead of 3). They probably also interpreted the DM apologizing over the misunderstanding as an admission of wrongdoing. Even if they're right, when people stop listening to you there's not much you can do to salvage the situation. The best you can do is put a stop to the argument and ask if they want to move on or part ways.

22:40 I agree to a certain extent, but if they are already in a scenario where most are knocked out and the dmpc has the chance to prevent the team from tpk, they should take it. Not in a crazy Mary Sue kind of way, but just as a regular character rolling to attack the boss kind of way. Think about it: in the world, they live in, would this person just stand there and let the boss have another opportunity to kill one or more of them when they have the chance to stop it?

OP of the intro story here, though Crispy was so quick on the draw I can't offer any additional insight lol

@enigmachaos4413

9 ай бұрын

what was that dude's problem, did you ever find out?

@TheMightyBattleSquid

9 ай бұрын

@@enigmachaos4413 Just had our follow-up game. He claims the egyptian-inspired game wasn't "egyptian enough" for him but it seemed like just an excuse as he was pulling a "you can't fire me, I quit!" The DM gave us a syllabus of sorts of the campaign before anyone joined that's packed with reference to egyptian mythology and history. Session 1 had us meeting the pharaoh for our grand quest and the place we met them had statues to the gods. There were characters in egyptian garb at *all* times. The enemies we fought the first 2 sessions were beasts that lived in/near the Nile river. You get the idea. The thing that made it obvious we were going to kick him was he decided to argue and yell about *BEING OFFERED TO DESCRIBE HIS TURN*. My character has reflavored spells like sleep so I described my spell to show the difference, the next player used a net on the boat we were riding to restrain rather than attack with his sword so he described himself frantically running over to do so, the druid described his transformations with unique flairs (such as a wolf with "sandy fur patterns"), and even the barbarian got into the fun referring to his whip as a chain and describing how he swung it around with his great strength. So, when the Problem Player just said "I shoot my crossbow and my turn is over," the DM said that was fine and it was their choice but he just wanted to reassure him that everyone else indulged themselves so *if he wanted do describe his turn in greater detail* there was no need to feel pressured to give up his time to have fun with it for our sakes. SOMEHOW, this set him off and he claimed that he should only be allowed to describe his turn beyond the mechanics if he's ending the whole encounter lol. That's a new one, I haven't even heard anything like that in horror stories.

Shorts of your back and forth between dm and players would be fantastic, like the one at 2:01 is a perfect example

Ya hate to see DMs this nice and cool get stuck with people like these guys . A shame his ideas are great but they ruined it

Your skits are getting better. Keep up the good work.

You have dark and gritty edge lord rogues and then you have my friend's rogue who successfully rolled acrobatics to stand on the ranger's shoulders to get high ground advantage on his next shot. They were both so excited at the prospect (I don't know why!) that I let them do it in the condition they don't make it a habit

@M_Alexander

6 ай бұрын

Fifteen or twenty years ago he might've shown some warning signs but he's learned to laugh at himself a bit and isn't taking his half-drow urchin rogue overly seriously

The rogues may have never learned the concept that "people in the real world can't read minds". It was annoying to hear that they just assume the DM will just know their back stories while refusing to actually tell the DM what it is. The fact that they also had a ton of complaints but never actually voiced it to the DM and now expected the DM to know those complaints are baffling. Either these brats are still children or they just never learned how the world and communication works.

Yeah, odds are that Rogue just wanted to have an excuse to fight Orcs without anything pre-written. Just, complete underdeveloped bs so he can play the game.

I'd guess the rogues suffer from having the idiotic and toxic argumentative mentality of "I'm never wrong and every disagreement with me is always a hill worth dying on!" that's everywhere these days.

@newbienoah9461

9 ай бұрын

*Narcissism moment*

This is kinda toxic 🤢 Also love your channel, I am getting back into the Dnd hobby and hearing your narrative along with tips brightens my day considerably 😊

I was a once a player who didn't talk much, eventually I opened up but by that time the game fell apart

Reason #98 On why I never play games with others. Typical entitlement trolls who have zero life experience. You give them an inch, they want a mile. One of the major points of session 0 is to figure out if this table is going to be a good fit. I think part of the problem is the GMs. They honestly want to be flexible and as open as possible. But they have to ask themselves the serious question, if I allow this player(s), will I adversely affect the fun of the other players? As we used to say in the Army, quirkiness is acceptable, but at the end of the day, you WILL follow orders.

Haven't even listened to the video yet, but pleasantly surprised to see a Zendikari vampire in the thumbnail.

This is beyond gaslighting 😮

"I'm done!"😂

I poke the chat with my spear. *Rolls Nat 18*

I gatta say on this one the DM is not blameless and I feel like a lot left out of the story.

those rogues were absolutely Kinda Toxic

i don't know i'm an old man the last time i played D AND D was 10 years ago and I have to say I was NEVER IN the mood for six heavy role players.

I hate the new survay of DnD. They Say that they are going to eliminate the possibility of the for the warlock to choose his spellcasting ability( inte, wisd or char)

@trappestarrgaming3422

9 ай бұрын

Yea cuz the community likes it the way it is now with charisma. I def agree I prefer it the way it is now

@ArcCaravan

9 ай бұрын

Not sure how balanced it is to let one spellcaster get to pick their spellcasting stat while everyone else is stuck with only one choice.

like #49!!!

@tod557

9 ай бұрын

#155

These players suck, for sure, but I'm also kind of not a fan of how the GM seems to feel the need to adhere to the exact wording of the module to the letter, rather than giving some slight leeway to the players in regards to how they view the area or creatures versus how they are written. The rogues wanting to hide in an alcove makes total sense; they wouldn't have jumped down into the area they went to if they didn't think they'd have any cover to hide in, which according to the module, they wouldn't. The GM has the power to say that there could've been some cover, but that's not how it's written, so he didn't give them that. If that affects the layout of the dungeon and overall fairness of the fight very much in the PCs' favor, then yeah, I could see wanting to change aspects of a room not being something the players have the ability to affect, but something like that, which could put the PCs in a massive disadvantage because of a misunderstanding, should've been a five minute, "Sure, there's a bit more cover there than it looked like, so you can hide there and do your stuff," kind of thing. Giving the players a tiny bit of agency like that is fine. The dragon at the end is the worse of the two; the dragon spots an intruder to its lair, who immediately flees rather than engaging in combat. If the module is written how it sounds, it seems like the dragon using its free actions to drink potions is something it does during actual combat when it's being actively engaged. However, it starts off chugging all of its potions before a legitimate threat even appears, making it super-buffed in a way that it's not supposed to be. If that were how it were meant to work, the dragon would probably have some kind of alarm trap that would alert it to intruders, and it would start downing potions before the characters even entered its room. But because it was given free time before starting the fight, the GM read that as the time for it to down potions, because that's how the module has it written. Now, these aren't hugely problematic issues, nowhere near the level of what the rogues are implying the GM is doing, and it's nowhere near as bad as some of the rogues' crimes (the "I have no backstory, but you should know that I hate orcs and why I hate them, but I'll never elaborate on the reasons why" is driving me crazy), but it does still seem like something the GM should take into consideration. Being too literal and not letting your players help shape the world a tiny bit to do cool stuff can be something that a GM does that causes friction. I'm not saying the players should have full reign over the entire world, but saying "You know what? Sure, that sounds fine, I'll allow it," to alleviate some minor misunderstandings is absolutely acceptable, as long as it's something somewhat fair. Some of what the rogues argued against and had fights over sound like they could've been resolved in this way, though the vast majority of it just sounds like them being bad players.

I will disagree, telling players that a module is combat heavy and asking to jump ahead feels like it would break verisimilitude real bad, I'd just fix the module, this in unrelated to whole mess though.

New rule, if you play card games or DND you have to learn how to handle autistic people. This will solve most of your problem player issues

Kinda toxic

Last

I do think the DMPC was a bit out of line. DMPCs shouldn't steal the show, that's for the players to do. OP had the right idea with Biff being a stand in, but unless it REALLY made sense for the DMPC to step in, they should be used as supports. I digress, I think it would be doable in 5e to build a magic hybrid support, so I'm not sure how that would translate to Pathfinder.

@simonO712

9 ай бұрын

I mean, that depends on whether you think avoiding a TPK counts as it "REALLY making sense for them to step in". Some people would while others wouldn't.

5th

@j.vazquez8966

9 ай бұрын

Like 58

kinda toxic ngl

Kinda Toxic

Kinda toxic.

Surprised at the potential ableism coming from you during the intro. Extremely disappointing considering how many in the community are ND or have other things that make socializing difficult. It's why I started the hobby and years ago I would have been that enby.

hot take DM is in the wrong, you don't need to tell people "this npc is stronger than you" but it should at least be hinted toward (i.e. judging off this guy's armor and equipment, it might not be a good idea to fight him, after a good perception check), also having a party-npc kill the boss feels wrong and the dmpc being created with rules the dm banned for the other pc's out of fear it would break his game is stupid, sure op claims they agreed to these rules, but they probably didnt know the npc would be that much more powerful than a player sure the players handled the situation poorly, and could've communicated better, but they're new and I think op mightve ruined the ttrpg scene for them

@hannon4

9 ай бұрын

Alright, gonna say this really is a hot take and potentially a troll but anyway so! Rogue 1 & 2 had familiarity with PF so they were not new and considering they had no lasting games for obvious reasons to. It was never about breaking the game that the more advanced character options were banned, it was to not overwhelm the paladin and sorcerer who -were- new to the game. Maybe the GM could have made some more descriptive natures of the NPCs to gauge the situation if they had time to. As with Biff. Biff was multiclassed to be a jack of all trades. He was not that much more powerful, just had low level options of each thing. That was explained at the start of the game and the rogues said they were okay with it. That isn't a lack of communication, they outright lied and tried to gaslight the OP. So if OP ruined the scene for them? Good, they seemingly ruined multiple games for others. They won't be missed by your logic. :P

Kinda toxic

Kinda toxic.

Kinda toxic

Kinda toxic