Messed up the outro… whoops. Guess you can leave both comments

@sherylcascadden4988

9 ай бұрын

Made it to the end... It's hard to play in a group of murder hobos who have no reason to be together... And a GM who forces them to be "hired" together so they can be a group. Was a great cluster F, and a game I "noped" out if at second or third session, along with another player who had all his character's personal equipment stolen and given to another character because the GM "couldn't think of another way to get them into the party"

@tonyromasco1735

9 ай бұрын

A witch/warlock devoted to Malconthet

@FlameUser64

9 ай бұрын

@@sherylcascadden4988 I agree, it's super annoying to play as a character who's wholly mercenary and self-interested in a group of characters who are wholly mercenary and self-interested. Like, no? I wanna play someone who wants to help people… which occasionally chafes when the DM wants to assign blatantly evil or morally dubious quests.

The proper response to "It's what my character would do" is "This is how other people respond to what your character would do".

@Youkaiyami

9 ай бұрын

We had problems with that at one of my tables. Guy didn't seem to understand that no, my character wouldn't forget how much of an asshole his character was to mine by the next game.

@IndustrialPelican

9 ай бұрын

My response is "Why would you make a character that would do something like that?". It's a fictional person, not a wild animal.

@krysbingham2501

9 ай бұрын

No matter what, some people don't understand that despite it's 'just a game', it's still people who experience bleed. If your character is a jerk but you love the people at the table, find a way to middle ground and always always make sure you didn't upset the other people at the table. Aftercare because of emotional stuff that may have happened is mega important. Copping out that you are knowingly upsetting your tablemates is cause for immediate ejected from the table

@Wintermute01001

8 ай бұрын

I play a chaotic neutral character who's smart enough to know they shouldn't piss off other party members because they're basically his business partners.

@blackfang0815

8 ай бұрын

@@IndustrialPelican I've adapted it to "Your only jobs as a player are to show up and to make a character who works in the campaign." Covers characters being a douche that creates problems for the NPCs and other player characters, as well as stuff like willingly avoiding plot hooks.

"I don't allow mind control spells to be used against other players without their consent." I 100% agree. How I run it is when someone tries to do anything PvP-ish to another player, I just turn to the player and ask what happens. My players learned REAL quick (in addition to me telling them this is how I run it) that if they're going to go into PvP anything, they better be SURE it's consensual.

@shadiafifi54

9 ай бұрын

Any sort of PVP has to be agreed upon in session 0, and _all_ players have to consent. Otherwise, it's just one guy trying to force others to do their bidding.

Worst player application / character concept I ever got was a changeling twilight cleric, their backstory was non-stop child abuse and CP. Something something catholic priest touching kids dialed up to 11.

@DHTheAlaskan

9 ай бұрын

Goddamn, save some tragedy for the other players backstories...

@destroyerinazuma96

9 ай бұрын

Imho it's the nonstop part that's problematic. And also if your table has some taboo subjects, then it's tough luck for anyone who treats the subject matter with gravitas. People often go to play dnd go unwind. If a player plays a noblewoman with a revenge against the rapist character goal, it might make half the table uncomfortable even if the player has the best intention and the campaign is advertised as gritty.

@EyeOfEld

9 ай бұрын

@@destroyerinazuma96 I think that stories like that can have a place at the table, but need to be discussed openly first so that everybody is onboard. When I was running a game, recently, where it came up (a city watch captain was hiring the PC kindhearted assassin type to deal with an abusive noble), I gave a verbal content warning to everybody first so that people were emotionally ready for it. That seemed to work well. I would also take a lot of care especially, or even just not do so altogether, if I know one of my players at a table has triggers related to it.

@Kevinblue035

9 ай бұрын

i had to deal with something like that in a pathfinder game i was part of a while back, we had all discussed beforehand that we were just gonna do a high adventure sort of game, nothing more grim than you'd see in a final fantasy or dragon quest game one of our players had wanted his characters' backstory to be that he escaped from a cult based on a combination of mormons and amish people, we didn't see anything wrong with that since "escaped from an evil cult" is a pretty standard fantasy trope, but when he finds out our magus is gay he hits us with "oh we're not allowed to do that. one time i confessed to the high priest that i was sexually attracted to my dad, and as punishment they made me impregnate a slave woman to fix me" needles to say everyone at the table was stunned in silence. also he was playing a summoner but never took any spells or a weapon, ever time we got into combat he would roleplay his character disassociating while his eidolon went insane and tore peoples' faces off with it's bare claws edit: for reference he was doing a "dumb and innocent" voice for his character, so imagine being told all that by patrick from spongebob or big the cat

Honestly this video sounds more a "worst player behaviour list" than a worst character trope list

@ShinyAvalon

9 ай бұрын

The difference between those is admittedly fuzzy when RPGs are concerned....

I think the worst character applications I ever received for a game were both for the same game. I ran a playtest of a Pokemon Mystery Dungeon-inspired RPG made by a friend of mine, a game where you played as Pokemon. I wanted to run a fun, hijinks-filled, zany beer-and-pretzels style game, so the concept was that Team Rocket had made an invention that turned people into Pokemon and our players were going to try to figure out how to get turned back. Fun times, had great players. Two of the applications I received: -This character was a suuuuper edgy weirdo who had been hearing VOICES since he was in the wombbbb, one of them was an edgy anime character from another dimension and the other was a super assassin etc. This was based on one of his OCs from some other thing yadda yadda. He had becoe a Dodrio, a pokemon with three heads, and the heads would always be fighting because the voices that he heard that were actually evil spirits possessing his body had become his other heads but since they were always fighting, they'd never actually do anything and he would be the one in control UNLESS something happened and they took controlllllll........ -A ditto that had been type-shifted (had its typing changed) to steel-type and thus every pokemon it transformed iinto, which it could transform at will into anything it had seen, would also be type-shifted into a steel type and be totally able to use powerful steel moves!!! Also because it was a ditto it could turn back into its original human form whenever it wanted, which totally wouldn't negate the entire point of the RP or anything. I later found out that the person who applied as this character had a........ um....... _strong personal attraction_ to dittos. *shudder*

@nomisunrider6472

9 ай бұрын

He heard voices in the WOMB? How? He hadn't even heard language yet at that point, the voices would just be meaningless noise! And gods I am so tired of the "hearing voices makes you evil" trope. Haven't people with psychosis been demonized enough?

@keybladewizard49

9 ай бұрын

@@nomisunrider6472 "In the womb" was an exaggeration on my part, sorry, but yeah literally as long as he had been alive because...... reasons?? and yeah, the bit about the voices was pretty oof.

My personal favorite: Players with a high persuasion skill rolling over and over until they get a natural 20, then they declare that they rolled an obscenely high number.

My ideal 'Pacifist' character is the type who says, "I know I can't kill you..." (Casts Hold Person) "...but they can."

@mentalrebllion1270

9 ай бұрын

Lol yeah I usually play the “they” in the party for the pacifist character player. Not blood thirsty but my characters are usually part of backstory or part of the set introduced and have some connection with the pacifist character before game start and is protective of the pacifist’s ideals even if they don’t share them. So me and the other player usually play into the “we got this” dynamic that having a pre established relationship feeds into for battle tactics. Usually makes it easier to integrate a pacifist into party dynamics, especially at the start.

@Drakoni23

9 ай бұрын

Currently playing an Abjuration Wizard with barely any damage spells. This is very much what it feels like and I love it ^^

@TysonRex37

9 ай бұрын

The you aren’t playing a pacifist.

@BordrKing

9 ай бұрын

My friend in a salt marsh game I run is an excellent pacifist cleric. He refuses to take the life of another sentient higher thinking being but will cast support spells and heal and he will participate in combat against animals and non intelligent monsters

@FlameUser64

9 ай бұрын

I usually play characters who try diplomacy first (or at least make sure the bad guys know exactly why we're about to beat them up), and when diplomacy fails use exclusively nonlethal damage whenever possible. It's fun to get in battles of ideals with major villains, and it's also fun to let the villain talk and tell you _all_ their plans. Also, my characters typically _love_ to fight and are occasionally secretly hoping for diplomacy to fail so they get to hit things, but still give diplomacy their best effort because it's usually the right thing to do. My system of choice is PF1e so most of my characters get to do nonlethal damage with bladed weapons, which is fun.

You don't need to be a good roleplayer to have high charisma, but you have to have a goal in mind when you're persuading. You CAN say "I want to try and convince him to lay down his weapon". What I, as a DM, won't respond to is: "idk I wanna do anything that makes him not be aggro lol". Cause then I have carte blanche to make up anything, and I'm also basically RPing your character for you.

I've been wanting to make a librarian character who loves surrounding herself with knowledge, is well read in general histories and records everything she can as a means of conserving a party's stories, but I've been worried that may come off as boring or unnecessary.

@StilltheAp0llyon

9 ай бұрын

Cool concept for D&D. The kiss of death for Cthulhu.

@Decadenttia

9 ай бұрын

Try it. You can have a notebook with yourself and ask about your companions life's, tribes, cities and every knowledge you can gather, to take notes. Show curiosity about dungeon's stories. You can also learn some knowledge about ancient magic items which could help the party. Lean on your companions to be protected at fights but don't become a burden to them; you can even roleplay asking them to teach you how to protect yourself or using basic light weapons. I can't see why it wouldn't be boring. There's a lot of challenging moments in the life of someone who leaves the security of thick walls and goes on adventure ^^

@shadiafifi54

9 ай бұрын

Sounds like either a Knowledge Domain Cleric or an Order of the Scribes Wizard (though it could apply to several other classes/subclasses)

@Juanito_Pecados

9 ай бұрын

Boring, depends on how you roleplay them. Unnecesary, depends on party composition and build. You can make a character that has the traits you described and make it interesting and endearing because, as long as it has a personality and cooperates with the party in their interactions, you will most likely fit well in the party character-wise (unless your PC morals and objectives are categorically at odds with the rest of the party). Regarding the unnecesary part, that is highly relative, but as long as you dont try to hog the spotlight or make a super redundant or not viable build (mechanically speaking and taking into consideration the other PCs) you will most likely be good to go.

@invadernav3422

9 ай бұрын

@@Decadenttia Yeah I had liked the idea of keeping a physical notebook in character! And I'd love to ask in character about the party's backgrounds and cultures.

not the graduation jumpscare!! hahaha

A player pointing you as a cheater when the 'cheating' was using a basic ranger skill being a ranger. But there was nothing wrong with his super cool barbarian berserk with BUSHIDO code of honor trying to learn necromancy.

@shadiafifi54

9 ай бұрын

"Rules for thee but not for me", sadly. I think he didn't want you to outshine him in any way.

A group that I used to play with included a woman whose goal in every game was to have a character that wouldn’t interact with NPCs…or PCs…or most of the world in general. She was given the option to just spectate but she insisted that she wanted to play. If I ever get around to writing them up I have a couple of horror stories to share involving her.

Oh my God, you know about TAZ Graduation. Can I convince you to do an indepth look into it? There is so much to learn about what not to do when dming even just in that first episode.

@CrispysTavern

9 ай бұрын

It was on my list. But I decided to take it off because the show is pretty old. HOWEVER! There seems to be interest, so I'll probably put up a poll at some point.

My friends and I are fans of the Darksiders franchise. We homebrewed the Makers as a playable race. Large sized dwarves with beefed up versions of dwarven abilities. All armor, all hammers, poison immunity. Downside is that they can't sneak very well

I had a Loot Hog for magic items; we all talked to him about it and they just used the "but its what my character would do", so i created a magic "Ticks" (they were the Size of a large Dog) and since they had all the magic items they went after them (the magic users were out of spells at this point), these thing were impervious to non magic weapons attacked them they pulled them into the nest, were the Loot Hog was attacked and the magic weapons were drained, then the giant Ticks attacked them and drained him of all of his blood (basically a co-companionship set up). the ongoing attack meant if he saved they would just keep attacking/draining so DEAD,with this the other players say "Oh well its a shame - lets leave before they come after the rest of us" and left, and latter in the tavern they all said that they would not go after the body until they got some thing to kill them, so they left him and never mentioned him again, and the Loot Hog made another character and if they looked like they were up to their old Loot Hog ways I would say is that a jar that moved or a giant tick (were every other player would Laugh) and the player would so their is magic items here and want to share them out - - - in game problems = in game solutions

Your job as a player is to 1) create a character who goes on an adventure 2) with a group of other people. To go on an adventure you must be willing to get in to some sort of danger/trouble in exchange for a reward of some sort. To do so with a group of other people, you must cooperate and work for the common good. If the character isn't doing those things, it's a bad character.

@FlameUser64

9 ай бұрын

Hey, adventurers don't have to be willing to get in trouble for a reward. There are all sorts of reasons to get in danger on purpose, ranging from curiosity and a need to get to the bottom of things, to a desire for vengeance against a particular foe and a willingness to pursue _anything_ that gets you closer to that goal, to just having found friends (the party) for the first time in their life and being willing to do a lot to stay by their side and protect them (because the alternative is being lonely again).

@DFAnton

9 ай бұрын

@@FlameUser64 Knowledge, vengeance, and friendship are all rewards.

While my first character was definitely played as an exaggerated version of myself (and coming from WoW I had a habit of collecting so much random junk), I managed to play my other two a bit more distinctly. It helps to keep in mind that your character is played by you, but isn't you. Like how an actor isn't their character outside the screen/stage.

I admit that I sometimes play outrageous characters and often i'm not sure if what my character would do is crossing the line of not. Usually if I'm doing something that'll sabotage the group I'll say "IF no one stops me I'll..." and I'll look around for permission.

My Worst D&D Character would be... Smile Jack. In my D&D online experience Campaign called (Fools Conquest): A Damphir Paladin/Rogue who's been constantly smiling to herself and does some Chaotic shenanigans for the sake of having 'Good Times' sorta like Alucard from Hellsing Ultimate Abridged, but the key difference here is that Smile Jack suffers 'Multi-Personality-Disorder' as she's a Double-Agent for The Human Empire VS Draconia (Monster Races Empire ruled by a Council of each Monster Races representatives.), She travels with a group called 'The Night Parade' in attempt to stop one of my PC turned BBEG (Isabella Blackwell: Knowledge Domain Cleric turned Warlock of the Great Old Ones) from unleashing her master Cthulhu to the world of Fools World. (Get the joke now?) as Smile Jack bothered to 'Sleight of Hand' (stealing) a talking Red Dragonborn's book and writes down her own fanfictions up until she gets her hand cut off. That's when I been told to leave the group and never come back to play with them ever again... 😥Worst of all? My own Little Brother still plays with them and was the ONE to tell me to leave the group. (Sad isn't it?)

I wish I could get into specifics for my top worst as I have no idea if the player watches these videos and/or reads the comments. So here's 2 of my other worst from my minor experience that are general: Characters that try to be the face at every opportunity, even when it is an important moment for another PC (though this is also very much a player behaviour issue as well, i.e spot-light hogging). And worse, be disruptive with what their PC is doing, unprompted, when not present for the current scene. And my other is when you are doing a low-level campaign, but a player insists (against upfront advice) on a backstory that fits a higher level tier in mechanics. Then they complain their character doesn't play how they like when they nearly die to low tier enemies. Maybe one day I'll share my worst as an anominous story (there's a ton of layers to it).

Redditors once helped me build a jerk noble who thought hitting enemies was beneath him. I ended up with an Order Cleric/summoner Bard. Even got tips on how to make him better and gradually less rude to others, acknowledging their qualities.

Loot hogs: as a player I try to explain that magic items should go to whoever will get the most benefit for the party, explaining that we are in this together, making the rogue sneakier or the fighter stronger makes us more effective as a group. As for non-solicited dice rolls: I will sometimes use a dice roll to make a decision for my character. (Rolling a willpower save to keep from getting rude with an NPC who really deserves stabbing.)

One of these days I have to send in the story from my first campaign where long story short, the college age DM was trying to get me (an underage girl) drunk. Or at worst, was trying to get me to drink something he had “tampered” with. Either way, not so good.

@tsifirakiehl4250

9 ай бұрын

That sounds terrifying! I’m glad you got out okay!

Bold of you to assume I can even describe myself

in pathfinder there is nonlethal damage it goes up if it is higher than current HP you go unconcious This is why dropping an enemy to 0HP drops them unconcious btw because the Nonlethal damage is 0 and the hp is 0 or less. This is a very simple rule to adopt into your games if you have a person who does not feel right with killing everyone

I had a Gunner/rifleman in pathfinder, 2nd character to change up from out main campaign to avoid burnout/fatigue from our usual. I gave him a flaw, that he had an obsession with his rifle. Like it was his baby, similar to the aspect of a Samurai and his Blade. He would get disadvantage when not having it on him. 20 minutes later, other PC(a friend) engages my character, trying to STEAL my rifle. He fails and combat is initiated(something i dont want) but his character now is trying to actively remove it from my person. We struggle back and forth, and i ask "can i fire a shot into the air to intimidate him, to get him away?" Dm: yeah, but if you do, you might draw unwanted attention... Me: thats fine. Someone is attempting to steal my main weapon, i just want them off. We roll, i succeed, PC makes another attempt. Dm: your shot is heard down the streets, the guard bell rung, they are on the way. Me:.....-looks at other player- -_-

I’m making a character for my next campaign, I’m sorta a newbie so I’m looking for ideas and improvement. She’s a little elf girl named “mandevilla marigold”. She’s basically this kid cleric (life domain as she is a healer) who despite being so young, has a lot of knowledge on botany and general flora. I based her off klee from Genshin bc why not. She doesn’t really have a sad backstory, her parents just let her adventure out on her own as long as she’s back for dinner. She has a cool witch/ magical girl outfit with a lot of flowers on it. She’s chaotic good, and would probably bring balance to the teams vibes if there are evil characters on team. Any ideas for improvement?

Yeah tbh the argument about the loot is like. Even if you aren't playing multiplayer, unless you are playing BG3 without using a single one of the NPCs (and if so, I'd like to know.. WHY???) then taking all the loot is honestly a bad idea lmao. Like, we give certain pieces of really good shit to our NPC members because they're proficient/it fits their build. What point is there in my bard hoarding medium/heavy armor when SHE CANT WEAR IT. Even in BG3 you totally divvy up the loot if you want to actually play good lmao. I gave up a pair of cool dexterity gloves to our barbarian because it raised her ac by 3 and mine by only 2, found some other good stuff that fit my bard instead. Idk. I just think that hoarding items is dumb, even if you're solo in BG3, personally

I played a "pacifist" (with heavy air quotes) adventurer. He was a bodyguard using arcane ward (Abjurer subclass feature) plus Armor of Agathys (via Dwarf dragonmark subrace) to be the type of character that punishes you for hitting him. Then I added in some artificer for battle smith for the pet and sentinel. He's all about not starting the fight, and avoiding the fight if possible, but damn will be sure to end it if you attack him or his allies he is guarding.

@shadiafifi54

9 ай бұрын

Some systems (like Savage Worlds and IIRC Champions) have degrees of Pacifism as hindrances. The most severe, of course, is not fighting at all and refusing to aid in violence, but the more commonly used types are "Will fight back when attacked" and "will fight but won't use lethal violence or won't shoot to kill". Your guy sounds like "I won't start a fight, but I'll end it either by knocking you out or sending you running". Cool concept.

@sintanan469

9 ай бұрын

@@shadiafifi54 Right scary build, too. With an upcast of Armor of Agathys you get a spell that soaks 15 damage and deals 15 cold damage to anyone that hits you. The arcane ward gets you a barrier that soaks about 14 damage before your armor of agathys loses health. You refresh that arcane ward every time you cast something as basic as shield or absorb elements. All said and done in a perfect scenario you're soaking almost 100 damage before you're out of spells, and you've dealt at least the same amount. You're also, you know, a wizard on top of this spell gimmick. If you start life as an artificer instead of wizard you get armor proficiency, which means you get all this plus metal plates protecting you.

I think the only time I rolled without permission first was when we were setting up and I was making sure my beyond20 was connected up properly. I tend to always do test rolls to make sure since I have multiple games I use it for and I have had some issues in the past. Best to get testing out of the way first. But I also usually call out “test roll” and roll basically my perception or some other stat. Only once has a dm looked at the result and said “I’m using that.” For that one it was when I rolled a nat 20 during a perception roll and we all busted out laughing. My next roll was promptly a nat1 and I apparently broke something because we do fumbles for that game. Weird thing? I swung between rolling both a lot that game but man the nat20’s were amazing and hilarious. Though most were for our amazing dog sidekick who we joke is secretly a Paladin because he kicks undead butt all on his own. I hear a lot of “Did he crit AGAIN!?” from the dm over it. It’s genuinely hilarious. Dm isn’t even trying to protect the party pet sidekick anymore because apparently he is doing just fine. Anyway, that’s off topic now but thought I would share the epic of our party’s pup because he is such a good boy. Oh and on pacifist characters, while I don’t play them, I have played in parties with people who make pacifist characters, three in fact. One was a peace cleric, one was a bard, and another was a Paladin/bard. I was perfectly fine with their approach and they did ok it with the party and set up with the dm things. Also, role play wise they made themselves good foils to our more brutal ones. In fact, for the peace cleric I played the best friend who was hot tempered but protective of her peaceful friend and his chosen way of life. For the bard, who went with a childlike optimist style pacifist (think closer to Steven universe, as in trying to find the best in everyone) I played as the world weary mentor who was learning to try to be more peaceful and optimistic for the sake of said student. And for the last I played a friend who understood the circumstances his Paladin/bard came from and how he was trying to break old habits from family and country culture. He respected his new friend’s decision and did his best to frontline for them and the rest of their party. I basically always did my best to make sure I played a character that would bolster the decision for pacifism in the party member and let them live that way, even if they didn’t agree or understand that way of life or thinking. Honestly I’m the one most mistaken for willing to be a pacifist. And maybe, in some ways, I am. I’m a tactical thinker though and while I do try to find ways of finding alternatives that aren’t fighting or killing entirely, I can and do sometimes play the more brutal one. Not in a bloodthirsty way. More like “you’re a liability so to protect what’s mine I’m eliminating you as a threat beforehand.” Which takes some other players by surprise. I do try to check in though when I think I’ll choose this course of action so I make it clear what I’m about to do and why and if I need to go about describing it a certain way or if the players are ok with it at all. It’s led to some amazing roleplay experiences though so I don’t regret playing like this. And I do love playing with pacifist characters, so long as it makes sense with the party dynamic and the player can explain well what they mean by pacifist and what that entails and work with the party and dm to help compensate for this direction (not that it’s bad, just that dynamics need to be adjusted because, let’s be honest, dnd isn’t really made for being a pacifist unless you toss in mind altering stuff which isn’t fair either and is shady at best. But it can be done with effort and accommodation). Anyway, those were just some extra thoughts of mine and I didn’t want to make a separate comment for them.

As for the GM controlling the narrative... I just finished another session where my players went in a totally unexpected direction in the middle of the dungeon... again.

@sintanan469

9 ай бұрын

Hey now, if that wall wasn't meant to be blown through it wouldn't have hit points.

@guyfawkes8873

9 ай бұрын

A tip: always make the direction you want your players to go in seem to be the most dangerous one. Works a charm for me.

@vodostar9134

9 ай бұрын

@@guyfawkes8873 lol. That's a great idea. I made the direction I didn't want them to go really difficult, but not particularly dangerous. That didn't work.

I mean, you can play D&D solo. It's not the most fulfilling experience, but it can be done.

@shadiafifi54

9 ай бұрын

And yet I suspect that would satisfy a lot of the Main Character Syndrome types. The biggest problem is that some of them feel like they need a cheerleading squad.

I'm pretty new to dnd and have only played a few characters, by which two of them were pacifist characters. By that I mean both of them wouldn't fight or do any type of damage. I talked to the DM about this, our DM being pretty chill with almost any character, allowed this. The first character was a Celestial Warlock, who was truly a pacifist and would only heal or proctect his praty members. The other one was a Bard, who didn't really fight due to his backstory but used a lot of buffs or debuffs and was just very viable out of combat. Even if at first one of my friends was a bit sceptical, it worked pretty well and everyone had fun. So, what I'm trying to say is that you don't need to do damage to be useful to the party, be it in or out of combat, and you can play a pacifist, while still helping during combat. But please talk to the DM if it works with the setting :)) (sorry, if I made some spelling mistakes)

Two thoughts. The magic hoarding wizard and the pacifist life cleric create narrative problems, too. Why would the party work with these characters. They are actively making the other party members' jobs harder. They'd cut them at the earliest opportunity. One for stealing from the party and the other for applying for a job they weren't willing to do. One of the guys I played with in high school would solo most investigations, especially in Shadowrun. This would leave the rest of the group twiddling their thumbs while he did a lot of the playing. He wouldn't even keep us in the loop, so our characters rarely knew where his was or what he was doing. The GM got tired of it, so once it was established that the character had not communicated his plan or location to the rest of the group, the predictable consequences of recklessly poking his nose in corporate business calling.

4:37 98 percent of the time people are on their phones at the table I play at, are on dnd beyond looking up spells or class features/ subclass features

Bit of a problem!

I want to second making sure the conflict between PCs is understood to be in game. I've played with people who made antagonistic characters and weren't up front about it and over did it.

Im playing an oath of the ancients lizardfolk paladin in this new campaign im in and i dont think its that bad, im focused on the nature aspect of ancients and i use vocal components in spells like command, suggestion, etc. In draconic to connect to the spirits of nature kind of like a false druid (tied to backstory) who took an oath to fiercely defend nature and all its creations by any means necessary (A.K.A. picking up a war pick and grabbing some metal armor)

@tsifirakiehl4250

9 ай бұрын

That sounds like a really fun character!

I feel like my players are the exact opposite of loot hogs. One time, I gave them a cache of magic items, and they gave 20% of it to an NPC who they knew was going to leave the party and go back to her temple soon. (Also, they lost the whole cache of magic items 10 minutes later by driving a baby sphinx to murder, but whatcha gonna do?)

Regarding "Fighter" - I think that was more about a player who refuses to engage in anything (including the other PCs) other than combat. We all have our preferences, some like character interactions best, some prefer exploration and problem solving, some like combat most -there's nothing wrong with that. If you just want a combat sim while the rest of the group wants intrigue, survival, or a mix of all three -it sucks for the rest of the table to have one player that just checks out for a majority of the game.

I actually think Spot from Across The Spiderverse could make for a great DND villain.

@roguebanshee

9 ай бұрын

You mean the guy who was introduced as a Spider-man villain back in the mid-80s?

@bagredecartola1289

9 ай бұрын

Flippin spot kicking in the forgotten realms, absolute goofy

@bretsheeley4034

9 ай бұрын

Spot would be a fantastic model for a villain if you could reasonably keep them alive in-game. PCs do have a tendency to execute the bad guys, but if that could be avoided, I could see a villain where the low-level heroes are hired to bring an at-first goofy but disruptive boss in alive, only to have them escape and slowly build up in seriousness and threat as the campaign goes on.

@LordSvzklx

9 ай бұрын

@@bretsheeley4034 as it happens, I think Spot himself has been killed a couple times but basically just regenerated in his little "spotworld" pocket dimension. Could do something similar with a dnd villain; not only do they just regenerate if they die (like some fiends and undead do) but when they do they actually come back stronger to compensate for the higher level of the party. great way of trying to teach murder hobos a lesson!

Is it wrong that I often try to create (N)PCs that (stereo)typically don't work with the full intention of adjusting them in ways to find a way to get them to work well with the group? If one doesn't work and I can't adjust them to work, I'm fully willing to bench them for new characters; but so far they seem to be working well. Currently in PF1e I'm running a chaotic neutral sorcerer with a "horny bard" mindset who casts nothing but fireball; though often they're meta-magically augmented for higher levels - like maximizing, enlarging, merciful.. and my favorite... altering the elemental basis of the spell - so he's launching coldball, acidball, and thunderball too. He's a playful hedonist asshole that several members of the group want to smack (or in the case of one of his siblings, shoot), but he never goes out of his way to fuck over the party members. One thing all my characters recognize is that the group is stronger than the individual; you gain more in the long run with a solid working party. Even my evil PCs know that and would go out of their way to help keep the lawful good paladin meat shield up. One other detail with my sorcerer is that when his behavior backfires on him (note: on him, not the party), it makes me smile - because I know he deserves it. Maybe someday he'll wise up; but, since his attitude hasn't changed in the last 25 real life years (created in 1998 and born in-game), I doubt it.

With the fighter named fighter I feel Called out because I made a warforged Bard character that was called Bard Well, before that, it referred to himself by its model name But people found That way do long so they just started calling him bard Because they whear a travelling entertainer.

@ShinyAvalon

9 ай бұрын

You forgot the period after Bard, so for a second I thought your character's name was "Bard Well." Ngl, "Bardwell" sounds like a solid name. ;)

You call them loot hogs,I call them loot goblins because of how fast they are at taking stuff,I am a fallout 76 loot goblin

when's crispy's tavern discord

@RaptorRocka

9 ай бұрын

Not happening (probably). Crispy said he’s super introverted and a public discord would stress them out

@tinycrimester

9 ай бұрын

@@RaptorRocka aww

Know a guy playing a twilight cleric but ignores the common folk being attacked in the night. That's their cleric domain's entire schtick and reason for the domain to exist; to safeguard people from things that go bump in the night so that darkness doesn't need to be feared. And his god is a knowledge deity. Cleric domains and deities go hand in hand so why the dm allowed it was beyond my understanding. And he's somewhat pacifist where all his prepared spells don't harm the enemy in any way besides the cantrips.

Actually playing Baldur's Gate 3 turned me off even further from DnD, reminded me how much work it is. '

@firstnamelastname7244

9 ай бұрын

It isn't really that complicated once you know what you're doing. But, if you don't like keeping track of everything in DnD, then there are plenty of more rules light systems that provide a similar experience.

@Darkloid21

8 ай бұрын

@@firstnamelastname7244 Even the rules light systems sort of take me out of the experience.

about the pacifist character. based on how you desclibe he will refuse to fight and will also refuse to heal, is the player choice to play this character. but the other players can also ask why the party keep the pacifist around? he dont fight and he dont heal, so why the in character reason for they to keep him around, share loot and rewards and thing like that, by simple logic a character like that would be kicked out of the group for leeching

Different from y- ... Bit of a problem.

BG3 will probably procure a number of issues with newcomers to the game. Single player mentality (possibly self appointed leader) NSFW horny gamers (Ao help us all) Save Scumming (excessive retcons won't work at a table)

@Valentine011

9 ай бұрын

Id be more worried about the pvp that BG3 has in it. I dont want players thinking its normal to pull blades on each other over party conflicts.

I really don't like 'optimized characters' because you're really just taking away the role play of the role playing game, you're just making a heavy combatant and then you might as well just go play a video game. I've got 2 characters in my game right now that the players are getting bored because I don't have enough combat, one is a barbarian the other is a ranger that the player herself chose to be the quiet off to the side lowly involved being and despite my ever trying to drag her in so she's not left out, she insists that she just stays off to the side then gets mad that she's bored... *sigh* I love combat, like anyone else who plays D&D I love combat scenes, fighting them and running them they can be intense and fun but if that's all you're after... go away, I have a story I'm running so there's RP involved at the same time. I don't care for optimized because that's the only thing you're after rather than being like "well here's the world my character has been in so they'd actually have this and do that" like why would ranger have favored enemy Orc if the setting hasn't seen orcs in decades because the last hordes were driven back beyond the horizon? You'll have way more fun playing a game in the same way it's given to you rather than penny pinching every skill and feat for that top end damage dealer and not seeing a fight for a few sessions... stop playing to win, play to have fun damnit.

People just play D&D wrong. They mix Roleplaying (to play a role of a imaginary character - a person that has nothing to do with you) with PlayActing (to play imaginary self). Playacting should be shunned and people who engage in this kind of degeneracy should be expulsed from any gaming group.

You brought me back to TAZ Graduation. How 𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑦𝑜𝑢.

@Gunner_Leo

9 ай бұрын

As someone who stopped listening after Amnesty, can you explain what's up with Graduation?

@TysonRex37

9 ай бұрын

⁠@@Gunner_LeoLong story short was just that… Travis really wasn’t a good DM. He tried, and as someone who tried to DM well and failed it’s *really* difficult to do, but when you’re doing a DND podcast… trying isn’t enough.