The concept of turning D&D into a game of werewolf is cool especially if the dm doesn’t tell the players who the werewolf is but there’s too much shenanigans in this case.

@xtrem5428

4 ай бұрын

It's interesting if the players know in advance it may be one of them.

This is why I periodically bite my party-members... just in case the DM wants to make me a werewolf, everyone else will be infected too!

Ah I know this story. There was an update later on, Monk and Bard also left the game and they started a new DnD group together.

@giodandosu

4 ай бұрын

oh!!! TY!!! is a good ending!!!!

Epilogue from the rpghorror story reddit: Everyone eventually left that table and formed a group of their own, and no one's spoken to that bad DM or Ranger since then.

I was on the DM's side until I heard that apparently the player character killed people as a werewolf without knowing. I like the idea of someone who is a werewolf without them knowing, so long as they don't do anything without player knowledge or say. You could have wisdom checks once the werewolfism is known, and change the campaign to have it be about taking out the werewolfism, not to kill a player character because of a past bad experience with a character of that class.

Honestly, part of me could almost understand suddenly making one of the players a werewolf, part of the deal is that you don’t always remember what happens when you transform. But altering backstory without the player’s consent is straight up criminal. Not cool.

@xtrem5428

4 ай бұрын

That, and the DM's motivation for it is garbage.

@DeltaEternity0117

4 ай бұрын

@@xtrem5428 absolutely.

@itap8880

3 ай бұрын

Also, the new backstory contradicts the whole "they don't know since they don't remember transforming" angle.

I think it's ironic that they preferred the rogue to play a paladin to avoid being "the center of attention" when paladins are nothing but subtle.

The D.M. Has literally stolen your player agency. There is no need to continue playing in this group, unless you can help the D.M. See things from your side and allow him to make things right again quickly.

I had the opposite problem in the current campaign I'm running. I wanted to work with a player on her character's backstory so we were both on the same page. But all I was told after she gave me her basic backstory was "no spoilers". So I pretty much had to operate in the dark for the most part when planning for her character. By the time it came to address her character's backstory in-game, she was a bit disappointed that it wasn't turning out the way she expected. And she quit not long after as the actual sidequest content I had made for character made her a bit too stressed. I think this was partially due to her IRL issues at the time such as her job, education and getting more involved in local politics. But also because she wasn't enjoying the story beats I had crafted. Not that she had a problem with the actual content I was portraying, but rather that she didn't what to do with the arc villain and his minions built around her character. The final nail in the coffin, I think, was when I had a gug attack the party from the roof of a cavern and she exclaimed at how frustrating it was that the party had to now look up when doing their perception checks. She quit the session early that day, saying she wasn't having fun anymore and then quit the campaign entirely later that week.

@giodandosu

4 ай бұрын

well you did try!!!

@xtrem5428

4 ай бұрын

The whole idea of a player hiding key plot elements is weird. The DM controls the world and everything in it, and basically writes half of the story by themselves. They NEED to know everything.

@timtauber5557

4 ай бұрын

lol always look up, don’t be silly.

The idea of one of the PCs being the werewolf without even realizing it isn't so bad. In fact, in a lot of werewolf lore, the inflicted person doesn't even know that they're a werewolf. In Buffy The Vampire Slayer, it took Oz waking up naked in the woods for him to clue in that he was a werewolf. In An American Werewolf In London, the main character had to wake up in the wolf exhibit at the zoo in order to believe that he was a werewolf. So its not without precedent. But this was done so poorly, and with such malice, that whatever might have been cool about the idea was ruined. So, the DM didn't want a rogue in the party because the last PLAYER who played a rogue in their group was an asshole, and his solution was to try and force this new player to play a paladin by killing her rogue. Fine. PLAY a paladin. But play them as LAWFUL STUPID. Your choice, DM. My intelligently played rogue, or my LAWFUL STUPID paladin, that's likely going to cause a TPK with their stupidity.

ranger: it fits my backstory man i wish i was a player in that table just to say "i attack ranger"

My ranger was made the butt of numerous jokes because i picked goodberry, all because my dm thought i would abuse it during his "Souls-like" story. He later went on to pretty much cripple his team, because a group of 6 lvl4 characters with no magical equipment and 2 minor healing potions each were supposed to somehow beat a cr15 Aboleth

@Moondramon

3 ай бұрын

Did the dm expected you to beat it or did he have a alt win condition in mind? I'm assuming running away wasn't a option?

I did have a NPC everyone knew was a werewolf seeking redemption.

The players have 1 character to play with, the DM has all the rest. As a DM myself, why do you need to fiddle with the players character? There is no need to. I often think of great ideas for a character I'd like to play. Guess what, that character becomes a BBEG a few sessions later. I often think of great ideas for the players characters going forward, guess what, IT'S NOT MY CHARACTER SO I SHUT UP AND LET THE PLAYERS DECIDE. One of my players a month ago came up with a great idea of what he's like to do & get the whole party to follow along. My response was, I'll set up the scenario, but it's up to you to convince the rest of the players to follow. I won't make them if they decide not to. It's a fantastic idea & I really want it to happen (it will be heaps of fun), but I'm not going to rail road the players.

That DM, who made the player a werewolf secretly without the player knowing, is a BS move. It's one of the things that can make players stop not just the session, but the entire game. If they wanted to work in "a player is a werewolf," it should have been worked out between the player and the DM from the beginning.

goddamn, I'm all for DM introducing unplanned twists to a PC to keep things interesting, but re-writing a backstory, planning on having a PC get killed intentionally, and refusing to communicate problems that could have easily been solved is way too many steps too far.

I like these videos, because it's how I keep up to date on the balance patches.

Were I the OP, I'd have been very vocal in my protest. The world belongs to the DM but the PCs belong to the players.

Bruuuuh, so much crap excuses from the dm and the other players. All you had to do is say “Hey, can you not play a rogue” if you were really so against it. But not only did you agree to have them be a rogue, THEY WERE BEING A GOOD ONE! So you not only go back on player dm agreements and try and make it in game “you kill them all, or you die” literally trying to artificially in game and out of game force a either or scenario. But guess what DM? Just like in game, there’s more than one choice irl. Like the “Gods cursed werewolf rogue” could flee the encounter, the player can leave the table. They should be counting themselves lucky they player didn’t kill off all the other characters before leaving

@shadenox8164

4 ай бұрын

Probably because they knew their dislike of rogues was stupid and they were too embarrassed to admit it.

Okay, sounds like the DM did a bad here, by trying to force rogue to become an unplayable character. As well as being cruel and manipulative, it's also such a major missed opportunity for the development of story and roleplay! How does the character confront their new wolf side? Is it something they actively fight? Do they come to terms with it and cope, and if so, how? Can they use it for good, like to redirect the pack, or divide them and turn them against each other so the village has a chance to counterattack or escape? There's so many unexplored themes here! But instead of exploring these ideas, the DM just used the werewolf affliction to divide and destroy the party, and spoiled the game for most of them. I hope rogue, barbarian, bard and even wizard found better tables to play at. I hope ranger and DM learned a harsh lesson. Also, the replacement and erasure of the rogue's backstory was especially rude - that's like, the one place where a player has the most creative liberty. No DM worth their salt does this. As a DM, the first option should be to adapt the world to fit the player characters wherever possible. The second option is, if the backstory conflicts so heavily with the game you want to play, the DM must talk to the player about it, give legitimate reasons why it would conflict, and work out a compromise. Never forcibly change or rewrite a player character's background without their permission, consent or knowledge. Of course, in this instance, none of that mattered to the DM - their problems stemmed from an issue that the rogue player had nothing to do with.

The issue I had (at first) was the fact that the player wasn't allowed to know. I've had instances where my character was posessed by different entitites but, I was always made aware by my DM when it happened, so I could try to roll to gain back my control of my character's actions. If DM wanted a player character to be the werewolf, then op could've really helped rollplay & make things more interesting, while also trying to regain control to prevent so many npc deaths. Lets be real here, the group should've just asked op to play something else, instead of pulling this bs last minute because they didn't want a rogue in the party.

@shadenox8164

4 ай бұрын

Or they could have just gotten over it. Imagine banning a class because you had one bad experience with someone playing it. It doesn't make a lot of sense actually.

YIRBEL LIVES! Huh sounds like an ongoing issue to sort out? Was this like a story the OP actively kept people on tabs with? I didn't know you can do that here!

Yeah that is some BS. Also they want to leave all that loot instead of taking it for themselves? What the hell is wrong with them?

Its one thing for the DM to keep something a secret that negatively impacts the player, like a curse or disease, but straight up editing a player's background, and furthermore keeping the rest a secret and expecting them somehow be fine with it is just so wrong. And like their whole plan was to get rid of the rogue anyways, so what would have happened if the party decided not to kill them? Did that player still have to kill the party? Will the DM force them to and cause a TPK, or cheat and kill the player anyways. What if they didn't wanna kill the party either? Now you got a rogue werewolf Like seriously who would be fine with a DM rigging the whole game not just to kill your character, but force you to play a new class. And there is literally no guarantee the DM wont just abuse that player again if they didnt like X or didnt appreciate their new class

“We didn’t want a character who takes over roleplay and spotlights himself. That’s why we wanted a Paladin.” Um, is this guy a bugbear with 50 dexterity? Because that stretch of logic is insane.

@shadenox8164

4 ай бұрын

The reality is ANY class can do that, paladins are just more attractive to that kind of player. The grievances they listed as "spotlight hogging" was literally just rogues doing what they're good at.

Just because one person plays a class one way doesn’t mean someone else will do the same. I personally play them when no one else has chosen the class and we have a healer. That DM and the Ranger are to delicate it sounds like.

@shadenox8164

4 ай бұрын

Sounds like they just hate rogues doing their niche well. I'm not even sure at this point the previous rogue player was actually a problem but was just good at playing the class based on the details we have.

This isn't necessarily bad, but proper foreshadowing is often needed. If the player does not know that he or she is a werewolf the best thing to do is to drop hints and have the player piece together the clues.

Here's my take...or how I would have handled it as a DM.... I would have written out various pieces of info on slips of paper and placed each into identical envelopes. players would then choose which envelope to pick and can open them in secret at their leisure. the envelope that declares who is a werewolf instructs the player in a way they can CHOOSE to identify themselves as the werewolf to me, the DM ...IF THEY WANT ME TO KNOW... otherwise, as a DM, i'm ALSO playing a game of werewolf with the players... And will have to proceed without KNOWING which player i've just turned into a werewolf. all the envelopes can also contain other elements / info , etc which players may wish to share with the group, or be instructed to keep private (DM's / players choice)

... I'm pretty certain in the first ADnD edition DM's Guide had a section on lycanthropy and that it encourages the dm to not tell the player if they became a were-creature. But that is under the assumption that the player character gets bitten during combat. I'm not certain which ed op was playing so not certain if the rules of lycanthropy was different or not, as whatever type of were-creature you became has their own mind and alignment separated from the PC. BUT, changing backstories and motivations without telling/asking the other affected player first seems very rude... also this sounds very much like a pre sess zero/session zero thing if the dm wanted to leave this as a surprise, they should have brought it up with everyone first before the actual first session. Should've waited to the end, lol. I wonder if anyone would have Kender war flashbacks?

Dang, the early crew

@TheNavarch521

4 ай бұрын

Early gang!

@AstorothEverburn

4 ай бұрын

Let’s Gooo

Major violation of consent that.

So ranger just comes to DM like "let's plot to ruin this character and kill them off somwe don't have a rogue!" What bizarre kaniving bullshit is that

the warewolf one... you just posted this one like 2 weeks ago man

Wow! That DM and Ranger are terrible.

Not allowing a player to play the class they chose *after* the player had been playing it for awhile isn't something you should do. Let it happen or make it known early on. Otherwise, if you really have to change things, talk to the player themselves directly and discuss the issue. It might not be a conversation you want to have, but its FAR better than just trying to force the change "and hope the player doesn't ask questions" like these guys did.

Personally, it sounds like an inexperienced group playing D&D to me. I remember making mistakes similar to what this DM did and they come from a time I lacked experience running a game. Same with the Ranger.

DM should've not changed backstory, shouldve referenced it occurring in the game so the player had hints. Lastly, even in a situation like this, DM should allow an opportunity to cure the player because killing off a character, especially forcing others to kill a party member, is rude.

What happened a month ago with voice actor

If the DM won't let you know your own character's background, he's just playing with dolls. I was in doubt about letting the secre werewolf slide, but altering a xharacter's backstory and motivations beyond just being an unwitting werewolf is unacceptable.

Let me just say that the game master and ranger player were both assholes. If you have issues with a player's choice of class, you talk to them about it, laying out the issues, and either give the player a chance to prove you wrong, or let them do something different. As for changing character, you never change a character's backstory without the player's permission. You can change things that happen later, such as having NPCs change in the present. That would be valid, since you're giving the player a chance to have an interesting story with NPCs they once knew, giving them a chance to explore how things have changed since the backstory happened. But you don't go "Oh, you're a werewolf and your village hates you." Speaking of the lycanthropy, that's fine. PCs can have things like becoming a werewolf happen, but it needs to be fair. Let them know something's happened, and give them an out. In the case of lycanthropy, I'd give the player information such as dreams of running through the forest and hunting a rabbit, eating it right then and there, before they woke up, the taste still fresh, and rabbit blood in their mouth. Give them a chance to roleplay. I would then let the player know that they had been cursed to be a werewolf and indicate that the church might have a way to deal with it. Going to the church would lead the party to a quest where they have to get a rare item to fix the curse, giving an exciting conclusion to the situation. Or maybe the player, upon learning about this goes "okay, I want to stay a werewolf," at which point I give them the ability to change at will once per day. But I would make sure the other players knew that it could be cured and that killing the character is not the answer.

Don't change the backstory without telling them

"dont play a rogue... they are too op... play a paladin instead, that is literaly the best class in the game...

So to sum up the whole story, 2 losers, backed by a 3rd, decide that they themselves are the arbiters of fun and everyone needs to play their way.

My first thought I can't type here. Hopefully they play with someone who is a were rogue without telling anyone😊

dnd people always finds reasons to play victim 😂