D&D Story: The NOOB Who Broke the DM
Вставка
- Опубліковано 3 лис 2024
- Download Knights of Pen & Paper 2 for free: get.gameinfluen...
Sometimes we forget that Dungeons and Dragons is a very weird game.
Playlists
Learn How to Play D&D 5E series:
• How to Play Dungeons a...
Link to the D&D 5E Class Guide playlist:
• Dungeons and Dragons 5...
How to Dungeon Master playlist:
• How to Dungeon Master ...
Website: dontstopthinkin...
Facebook: / cjleungdst
Twitter: / cjleung_dst
Patreon: www.patreon.co...
Minds: www.minds.com/...
Hey everyone. I have been reading your messages and I have noted that the sponsored video format can be improved. I am still figuring out the extend of my obligation with sponsored videos, so it will be better in the future. Also, I just want to point out to you guys that, despite how frustrating he was being, there wasn't an ounce of malice coming from Steve during the session. It was just him being him.
Don't Stop Thinking
I didn't worry much about it, since I'm used to concentrating on the most relevant visual information. The advertising format may thankfully fail to distract a visual-learning hyper-concentrator such as myself, but it isn't too friendly for people with ADHD and the short attention spans of today's internet-submerged youth.
look it seems you never talk about it with steve you should go and ask him about him listen of his critism and then home think what he was right and what is wrong of him
note: dont try to correct him on the spot, just listen and be the jugde what he was right and what wrong try understand what it was in his head
chris smeros I have no idea what you were trying to convey.
Simple rules explanation would have solved Steve's problems. Steve your character has an alignment. This is what alignment is. To level up, you have to play within the alignment of the character. What would a good guy do? Yes you can play evil characters. Evil characters are harder to play. Start with a good character. The problem solves itself.
Since I've come back to this, I have been wondering; has 'Steve' seen this video by chance? Since you said this game took place a few years ago, I wonder if he has changed as a player since then, and could take an honest look at this video and say "Wow, I was being kind of silly, huh?"
Or maybe not, and demands to know how many goblins you're really hiding behind that screen of yours.
Soooo during one campaign we had two bards and the rest of the party had high charisma and we eventually formed a boy band.
Eventually the DM created a rival boy band. It was pretty funny and we made a bunch of gold in the process.
So basically NSYNC Vs Backstreet Boys?
This is awesome.
Bunch of Gold? What of the R & D 's incurred fees? And the expense of Merchandise, Promotions, Touring expenses, Hotels & Meals,...
No, you're in it because you must create soul stirring music!
The other People make the Gold.....
You Win but Lose.... Advance a level & select your new Abilities.
That reminds me of the best session I've ever had. Our bard met his nemesis and dueled him. But they're bards, so it was a contest of performances. So the wizard and warlock sabotaged the nemesis with invisibility and unseen servants. Then the entire party made special effects, were backup singers, etc. The whole thing was incredible.
A newborn baby takes a look around and says...
"So this is life, huh? Why would anyone play a game so stacked against them?"
lol
That would actually make for a hilarious campaign setting. The players awaken in the bodies of babies in a delivery room, aware of their previous incarnations and in complete control of their actions. What do they do?
Inevitably, someone will want to kill someone and take their money.
That's kinda the point of existentialism, or even suicidal thoughts.
@@Elliandr "can I grab a scalpel?"
Dm: "uh, roll Dex. You're a newborn."
*passes*
"I'd like wait until the nurse tries to pick me up, then slit her wrists."
Dm: *facepalm* "fine, role a melee attack.*
Next player: "while he's doing that, can I use eldritch blast on the doctor?"
Yet another player: "since I havn't been born yet, can I get a suprise attack and backstab damage against our mother?"
And thus the three pchyobaby bandits were born.
@@ancapftw9113 Again : A hilarious campaign setting. Obviously not a serious one, but sounds fun. I once wrote up a campaign setting where all the players are the children of the last generation of epic level heroes, which was interesting, but not newborn interesting.
"But how do we know you are just not making things up?"
- I am making everything up, that is my job. My job is to make the story, reward and punish the players for what they do within the story.
But that is cheating. It isn't in the rules that the Gods get involved... You're just making things up.
Khaeldranis so what happened after the trial and such I'm very curious?
I think the problem here, is that in this case, the DM was not "making everything up"... their group was playing a prewritten story (The lost mines of... "whatever")... It sounds to me like "Steve" didn't understand that most D&D games are not prewritten adventures with scripted events, but instead simply "created content" made by their DM... This is something that should have been explained to him.
As for asking why his character needs money... my answer to that would have been much more simplistic, I would have let him answer his own question, with a simple demonstration....
Steve: "Why does my character need all of this money?"
Me: "Steve, do you have your wallet on you?"
Steve: "Of course... Why?"
Me: "Let me see it for a moment..."
Steve: "*hands me his wallet*...
Me: *takes all of Steve's credit cards and cash out of his wallet, and sticks them into my pocket*...
Steve: "What the Hell are you doing?!?"
Me: "What do you need all of this money for?" ... ... ... ... ...
It shouldn't take long to sink in....
Sorakiba
In terms of modules, many, most if not all are very open. The story might be pre-written, but the story that is told isn't. In the Lost Mines of Phandelver and in all books I own, it literally say that the interpretation of the story is your own and you should make whatever changed you want. In the current module I am playing, curse of strahd, Strahd is a vampire lord that wants to test and torment the characters as much as possible. The book never states that you will meet Strahd at all before Ravenloft, but it also states they should meet him several times and the more the better for all Strahd cares. There is no such thing as pre-written for a DM, the story is yourself and you make everything happen the way you want it to be.
Cloud Seeker...
I have been a DM/GM for nearly 30 years, playing across multiple editions of D&D, Pathfinder, R.I.F.T.S, Shadowrun, Bleach, Star Trek, Star Wars, and many other systems... As such, I am well aware of everything you posted. However,... a brand new player who has never played any kind of RPG before, and is introduced to a prewritten module, with scripted events as his first encounter with D&D, will probably not know this... and might ask the DM a question like: "How do we know that you aren't adding more goblins to the fight than there are supposed to be"... A question like that - which was specifically asked by Steve - ASSUMES that there is SUPPOSED to be a certain number of goblins attacking, and that the DM did not create the encounter himself.
In the example given in this video, Steve seems to already know that the scene was a prewritten scene,... a scripted event that is supposed to have a specific number of goblins attack. Yes, you are 100% correct that the DM can change the encounter however he wants... but Steve doesn't know this, and is asking how the players are supposed to know that the DM isn't "cheating" by adding more monsters - In other words, Steve beleives that "only X number of monsters are supposed to attack, because the module says so"... This is why it needs to be explained to Steve that running modules is a little different, and that the DM can still change anything, at any time.
The last time that I ran Rise of the Runelords (a Pathfinder module), I had the players create the characters using Pathfinder rules, but I had them start in Faerun, on Abeir-Toril, in the city of Waterdeep... all of the knowledge the players and their characters had, were from the world of Abeir-Toril... I had them get blown through a portal, and end up in Sandpoint, on the world of Golarion, where they knew nothing of the foreign new world... and 50% of the entire campaign was them trying to figure out a way home. Needless to say, I had to significantly alter the campaign from what was written in the book. Anyway, rule 0 is the most important rule, and should always be the first rule explained to new players.
"Can I kill him and take his money?" Average d&d session, tbh.
"can I kill him and take his money?"
and thats all for this week. thanks bob, you ruined fun in 5 minutes.
pft we need his money more than he does, I don't see him looking around for the lost mine!
Well they almost got kill getting there then robbed instead of payed as agreed. Evil town must be purged, he is doing paladins work.
Well, we actually enslaved a hostile NPC after I intimidated him, and now he's part of the party (much to the chagrin of the DM). So I guess it can go any way :)
@Dewani90 "consequences that will grab them, tie them up, and throw them inside a dungeon or kill them, *making them lose quite a lot of their quality fun time."*
Wouldn't that be considered 'bad DMing', since the players are always supposed to have fun (usually with little regard to the DM), because it removes their agency, and players hate having their agency removed, even if the players were warned, since the act of warning them is (somehow) railroading them?
Sarcasm aside, I say all that because I seem to find an increase in D&D YTers giving this kind of DM advice.
During the session, when/where is the DM supposed to have fun if they are basically supposed to constantly dance to the tune of the players? Is there no middle ground on the "DM Fun Spectrum" between _"I Must Have My Story Play Out"_ and _"I *Must* Be Happy for the Players, No Matter What They Do"_?
TBH I'd be tempted to let him see the consequences of his actions, the crying child begging for their own life, screaming and alerting others to the area, and just see how he handles the situation.
Rush Hammer Same bro, I like to see their reaction to that situation. In my first time DM’ing a campaign I put drunk villagers and the players fought them and stayed in the Tavern for 2 hours and that’s all they did that session.
That sounds fun! when I was playing D&D our party was attacked by a wolf, and rather than shooting it I waved an arrow like a stick and threw it yelling "see the stick? follow the stick! Fetch!!" and the cool thing is the wolf decided not to attack me, of course, the party ruined it, killing them but still great fun!
This is the correct way to handle it. I was on the players side while watching this video. Let him do what he wants to do. If his character dies, he dies.
yeah, I need to find a new group of friends so I can start playing again.
Exactly. That and do NOT let him KEEP trapping you with 'What If" questions which can go on forever. Simpler to counter those by saying 'Is that what your character is going TO do, yes or no ? You have six seconds to decide..." ;)
Player: "are there consequences for me to kill the mayor"
Me: "well, that question is not for me. do you, controlling this character, think there are consequences for killing a town mayor? What do _you_ think will happen?"
Player: "does my character need this money? Why does he need this money so badly?"
Me: "that's a good question, why _does_ (character name) need this money? If he doesn't need the money, what does he want or need?"
Player: "what stops you from cheating?"
**casts zone of truth on me**
Me: "two things, one, making sure the table and players have a fun time, and two, I have to follow the rules"
*rule 1 of D&D, the DM can break the rules, as long as its fun for the group*
steve, I am a *GOD* and I will go the old testament vengeful god on your ass if you dont stop being stupid.
Dungeonmaster (1985)
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!"
Take that wannabe god. lol
MrAnimepredator that's a great way to lose a new player forever.
Purple Insect always answer with another question, great ways. there is the raining anvils trick....
@@jayeisenhardt1337 You will never reach that truth. GOLDEN EXPERIENCE REQUIEM
Isn't "cheating and making it up" the short definition of DM?
there is no cheating in dnd the rules arent rules they are just a guide.
DM: The big bad is immune to regular weapons
noob I has big bad killing weapon in my pocket hurr
@@chaka2509 Players can cheet.
Dcheating and Making it up
DM
My party during our first or second session tried to question a call, and I straight up just told them "you live and die at my whim, don't think you have any choice in the matter" and that kind of shut them up. Mind you these are friends I've had for years, and they know me well (also as the loudmouth in our group). And through our campaign they learned that I'm pretty fair, actually arguably too forgiving. Also helped that we were all brand new to DnD so they let me take the lead.
I'd tell him the DMs goal isn't to win, but to make sure everyone is having fun while telling a story. The DM's win condition is how much everyone else is enjoying it.
Also there is an expectation to go adventuring and/ or dungeon crawling, but the game is more improv than anything else. Thats why the DM can change things on the fly too.
Mepholar exactly.
Yeah I agree with this. this Steve seems to think that it's the players vs. the DM, which is NOT how it works or should EVER work. The DM is the one that 'tells the story' and the players are the people that gets to take characters in that story, give them free will and the power of choice in what they wish to do.
Player Characters also needs to be Adventure-interested and actively seeking the chance to go dungeon-delving, ruins-scavenging, etc. If the character doesn't not want to do any of that have got no other primary motivators to do so, then they aren't eligible to be a Player Character anymore in the Campaign.
Also another "Win" condition could be reaching Level 20 (good luck at that!). Unless or until they finally make a supplement for 5E regarding legendary characters for level 21-40 like in previous editions.
@ TheAngryDanishViking
Steve didn't pick the fight the DM did. DM unwilling to change , unwilling to complete the quest they finish, unwilling to pay up, unwilling to let him not find the dorf. He blew his own trains off the tracks he set by telling them they were hired to deliver the goods, and failed to respond when they did just that.
A simple sub-clause on a contract to protect the dorf, or dorfish runes unlockable only by the dorf to complete the transaction, or simple payment then side quest #2 find him and the body guard.
Then he tells him he the game is about making money when he was just robbed of payment. lol He does start off this video saying what is expected of the players, so adaptation looks difficult if he has everything laid out that hard but to me the unexpected is where the fun starts as it's a story the group makes up together.
+Jay Eisenhardt
Neither of them seemed to be picking a fight, but the moment the player said "Why do I have to earn money?" that's a red flag that the player doesn't understand DnD. People talk about railroading like its a bad thing, but it's not. No game can ever be truly "open world", it's all about how interesting the track is. The problem with players like Existential Steve is that they won't be ever satisfied no matter how interestingly you put it and will just keep "questioning" things Out of Character.
This is what happens when true neutral alignments manifest in reality.
Sounded more like chaotic evil to me.^^
@@Alresu chaotic indeed 😁
You mentioned that Steve was into board games and show him holding Settlers of Catan. In a game like that, everyone is on equal footing and is competing against one another. DnD is very similar, but different in that one person has to set up the game and serve as a storyteller and adjucator. It sounds like Steven thought you were another player, and his goal was to overcome your tricks and traps to beat you, personally.
When a player asks things like "How do I know you're not lying? How do I know you're not cheating?" I would tell them that I'm not a player in the game itself, I'm setting up the story to give the players room to excel. I tell you how characters will react because we're telling a story together and I want you to make the best choices for your character so your story is interesting and compelling. Make it more players vs. monsters and less players vs. GM. Not saying that's what you did, but your answers definitely sounded like "just trust me, okay? Everything will be fine! Please don't look at the man behind the curtain!" It seems like Steve was worried he was falling for a trick and he'd end up "losing" to you, so to speak, which is a concept that needs to be cleared up before he can really enjoy the game.
Yes, Steve was definitely thinking about the whole game in the wrong framework. DnD isn't like other boardgames because there isn't a win-condition, the goal is to tell and interesting story not to beat the game or to beat the other players. So concepts like cheating don't really apply.
Yeah, personally one of my players thinks of the game as a player vs dm thing.
"Do you have a ring of feather fall?"
Merchant: yes, I can sell it to you for 600
*buys it then lets me know it's so he won't suffer fall damage on his mount... this is a level 8 player right now and he's concerned about minor fall damage... and thinks he outwitted me by buying this item... "oh no... he has the first level spell feather fall... whatever will I do now?"*
When he unlocked a chest earlier that the party couldn't open I outright gave the Cavaliers saddle, giving enemies disadvantage to hit his mount while hes on it, he acts confused... like "but... I have the ring of feather fall already"
Again, ge simply doesn't understand that I don't care and I can easily kill him, let alone the party, if I wished. The saddle will help keep that cr2 mount alive without me having to wonder about bluffs or not, plus hes for a ring of feather falling so I don't need to be worried about him falling to death.
Ive told my players this again and again and he doesnt seem to realize, the more the players can take, the more I can push and will push. If they're really strong imma keep pushing them to realize how strong they are. For instance they now have a barbarian this resistant to 3 elements, that's pretty fuckin powerful and allows me to put more enemies. On the field since they can withstand the higher challenge
I have 2 GMs I play with, n they had the opposite problems. One was too worried about killing us, so we kept utterly destroying all opponents with ease (we also had a cheating druid that was using the GM's inexperience with Druids to turn into any beast he wanted, well above his skill, and a Paladin that didn't know his class and as adding strength and profiency to his divine smites)
The other DM told us straight up (because it was originally supposed to be a one off session) that he would pull no punches and we could die. Then when we ended up playing a 2nd session anyway, in the first round of combat my Gloomstalker Assassin (that I had done SOOO MUCH BACKSTORY FOR) was invisible in the dark, surrounded by unknowing enemies.... Our only non-darkvision player walks in with his lantern out, n I get the absolute shit kicked out of me. Then nat1 my death saves.
I fully expected to have to write a new character already, but he was nice enough to pull a cleric npc out of his ass to show up, raise me, Then leave)
DnD is a cooperative social game, as you said. Cooperative includes the DM, not just the players. So the answer I'd give a player like "Steve" is this: I am not your enemy. If I was, the game would end with the famous sentence "Rocks fall, everyone dies."
My "job" as a DM is to help you tell an entertaining story, kinda like a director works in a theater play. What is considered an entertaining story is totally dependent on your table, which is why session zero is so important.
DM and players is - as you correctly pointed out - a relationship of trust. You expect your players to give you the benefit of the doubt. In return, your players expect you to help them tell a story that is better and more entertaining than "Rocks fall, everyone dies".
PSA: If any of your players ever says "No, this is not what happens here", it is time for an out of character talk.
MadMax2910 Also all of that should have been told to him before the game
He did say that he told that player that D&D is a co-op storytelling game, I believe that it’s just the new players perspective coming from probably pretty competitive games and being thrown into something radically different. I’ve played with players like this, and it takes a few sessions, and maybe watching stuff like crit role and Harmon quest to help them understand what the game is all about.
I've always reacted to "Can I kill them and take their money?" and similar questions with "Why?" instead of "Are you sure?"
Surprisingly, a lot of potential murderhoboing gets prevented by that.
It’s usually “Why” first, then the reason and potential consequences; and THEN it’s “Are you sure?”
Yeah I know this is a four year old comment. Have a wonderful day.
6:15 the DM is "just making it up" for everything in D&D. I think he's probably heard stories about "killer DMs" and thinks that an antagonistic DM is the norm.
lanz0r4tehwin I dont like this: "rules dont aply to me" mentality, it is true but I wouldnt say out loud, players needs to expect some greater power behind DnD game, power that you are only manifestor to.
Its subjectiv... but DM is the god. He IS making things up and he IS "cheating"... BUT he IS NOT playing against the players. He is playing with them. If the players dont have a good game - welp, the GM have no players.
Player: How do I know-
DM: I AM THE RULES, I AM THE LAW, I AM GOD!!!!!
Player: Wut?
Big Mac a better way to phrase it so by saying “I am the rules”. The rules can’t cheat, because they are the rules.
You need to address the underlying argument, the problem is not about cheating but about the game being fair or you being seen as the enemy. I would answer, "My goal isn't win, my goal is for *you* to have a good time and come back to play again. Me killing you off is easy, so that's not my goal, my goal is to make you believe in a world for the few hours I have you".
The video game running through the whole video is annoying. Your story is the content.
I used the windows key and + to zoom in on him, so I could ignore the advert.
lol. Ok.
It's money for him.
It would seem advertising money is more important to him than user experience.
His sponsors won't know i zoomed in. So no harm done.
I see he had a "Players vs Dungeon master" mind set. That kind of kills the fun of the game. I hope he realized dm's job is to make the game enjoyable and challenging. If the dm wanted to kill the players he can easly do it anyway. There would be no "Versus".
Yup "You enter the small hut"
Player: "what do I see"
DM: AN ELDER RED DRAGON
Player" IN THE HUT?! HOW?!"
DM inside the hut the dragon rears up and attacks *rolls 2* but misses. He then does a somersault and runs you over with his enormous body.
Yep that's right! I'm grateful for the fact where my DM did not end my character as soon as he could've! Recently, me and my party were raiding a fortress that was conquered by enemies so we can restore it, and as I get a tower with a giant crossbow, I attempt to capture someone so I can question them, but he tears his head open and dies as he reveals an intelligence devourer. That creature could've eaten my brain out or taken away my intelligence, but the DM had it run away with a goblin.
@@EldenRingplayer407 I ship it
I was laughing until I choked at Steve just randomly wanting to kill a little old grandma and questioning why her grandson would even have any problems with him doing that in plain sight. Galaxy brain murderhobo logic right there.
It seems to me that Steve was asking the "How do I win?" question without overtly stating it. I'm presuming that, due to his experience with board games, he had an expectation for a modicum of "fairness", which in his mind, was not actually presented in the way he had expected.
Obviously you were getting frustrated at the time, but the correct answer to "How do we know you're not just making this up" is:
I am making this up. That is literally my role here.
"How do we know you're not cheating"
You don't, but my goal isn't to kill you, because then I have no one to play with.
The way you know I'm not trying to kill you is you stand a chance. I could plop a dragon in here or have a never before seen volcano erupt under your feet. I keep things moving along whatever lines float your boat. HOWEVER there is a story that I've forked out to some degree so its not ALL made up all the time.
I would have told him that this isnt a fight against the dm, the dm is in charge that the story flows correctly setting the scenario acording to the characters. And he could do wathever he wanted but it all be his idea and his doing.
I've played with a lot of different people and I have to say I've fortunately never encountered this type of player, at least to that extreme. But I can see it happening.
Also, I'm glad you got sponsored! Just maybe don't have it playing off the side the entire time during the video next time.
I’ll be honest, as someone with ADHD I had to watch your video with my hand over half the screen so I could pay attention to your story.
I think I shouldn't have come up with better idea for showcasing the gameplay.
same lol. I just scrolled down and listened to it while I wrote some comments. Crazy how different ppl are. Some ppl sound like they were not only able to watch it but also enjoyed it, I cant even comprehend lol.
PyroTornado I tried watching but my brain is incapable with those levels of distraction....well any level tbh.
At least it made me want to take a look at the app. So it has that going for it...
I closed one eye.
Holy shit, my DnD group and I did the SAME THING in lost mines. The only difference is that we're all long time players, so we suspect something foul will happen if we leave the cart unattended, but we also don't want to split the party, so we just decided to travel onwards xD. Our DM told us after we got to town that we were over thinking this campaign, so we eventually got in the groove of it, but the poor dwarf was beaten bloody by the time we got to him.
TheFreakDownStreet I am probably the only player and dm who is fond of splitting the party. I hate when people say "don't split the party" because that's like the biggest meta game. Most DND parties are made to balance off each other so splitting it up to teams that are not the best is very entertaining for the players and me as the dm. It gives people time to understand and explore different options and norms
@@captaincaterpieI dislike splitting the party because my character then does not know what is happening to the other party. Its like ignoring half the story.
@@Saltiren that's completely understandable.
O MY GOD. ON MY SCREEN, HE ASKED STEVE, "Is this what you really want?" THEN IT JUMPED TO AN AD AND IT SCREAMED "YYYYEEEEEEEESSSSSSSS"
"It's apart of the default social contract that governs the game. A DM has ultimate power in the fate of the game, but it's in his/her best interest to make the game enjoyable for those who play, another part of the contract. Also, characters created by the DM have personalities that the DM roleplays as a Player does their PC."
My response.
When it comes to DM's and letting players do what ever they want. I'm the type of player who tends to enjoy the game when it's strongly enforced and reasonably restrictive. Like we can still do anything we want but we are limited by logic. I've been in games where the DM pretty much just lets anything a player says happen and I can see how that's fun for others, but it can get crazy and too unrealistic for me. At some point, it just becomes a bunch of people talking about random illogical stuff happening rather than us actually playing. I like having/playing a cool fun character but in a world bound by logic and rules both to make it feel more real and to make it fair. Plus It's not fun when some players get to break reality or have homebrewed rules that make them better than others or homebrewed or inconsistent rules that undermine your character's skills or background.
When magic and monsters get involved, logic has already left the building.
lol that's sort of true. Though even the monsters and spells/magic items have rules and logic they need to follow. Its all designed to be balanced and logical, at least as much as a magical fantasy world can be. I'm just basically saying I tend to enjoy games where the DM actually enforces and follows the rules and mechanics rather than ignoring them or even homebrewing a bunch of rules or mechanics and or letting players come up with their own spells or abilities. Nothing wrong with those games, I just personally don't tend to enjoy it.
J-Bar even though they follow rules, it’s still illogical what some of them can do, sometimes changing them slightly can give amusing results. 😏
I like the mentality that players can *try* to do anything, but whether they succeed depends on what is reasonably possible. Like, sure, you can try to seduce the door, but you won't succeed unless you have some kind of magic power that makes such an act possible. There are DMs that need to learn to say "yes" and DMs that need to learn to say "no", but there are also DMs that need to learn to say "you try, but nothing happens".
What if I cast Animate Objects on the door?
it was like revelation occurred to me when he said "but how DO you know that the kid would do that?" which I have run Phandelver, I don't remember there being a grandkid (already changing the module). But also how would you know the kid might not just "You have killed my grandma, take me with you!" or the kid just runs away into the woods to die or become strong to kill the adventurer. None of that stuff is written down so you have to make it up.
the noob brought a fresh perspective to the game. he really got a lot of DM's figured out where they just add and remove foes or change elements to make it fit THEIR story instead of the players.
Your player imagined that he was engaged in a game of trying to beat you, the DM. Like, it's a team of players against a single nebulous foe. That's the problem of bringing in a hardcore board gamer: they will invent an antagonist where none exists. I've played a few board games where the antagonist is mostly just the roll of dice but can still reliably result in the players losing and it gets messy fast. When we actually won against a game heavily stacked against literally all the humans at the table, it was almost confusing for the veterans.
D&D is... almost not a game. It's more like improvisational acting with dice rolling on the side. It's kind of why I long for a way of using computers to speed up all the combat stuff because combat in D&D has a bad habit of taking up a lot of game time and mental space in both the players' and the DM's heads, even though it mostly doesn't matter. For every truly memorable miraculous save in a combat, there's dozens of ho-hum slaughter-the-goblins-and-loot-bodies encounters.
A group of friends and myself have been playing weekly since the start of the year, with no more than half of the group having any experience with the game. Our DM (at the time) ran us through two one-off dungeons before Mines of Phandelver just to familiarize us with how to play. Due to still trying to nail down a regular schedule that works for everyone, we wound up missing one player for the first session (which ended with us just about to enter the goblin cave). When the next session started, the first hour was spent following his perspective as he tried to reconnect with the party, and since he actually had no idea where we ended up, the results were spectacular. He found the dead horses and signs of combat, but because we had hidden our caravan just off the road, he didn't even realize that we hadn't kept moving towards town. So while we all fought through the caves and ultimately ended up saving the hostage, he wound up in town with no money, no weapons (his character's absence was explained as him having been drugged and robbed by a prostitute), and no idea where we were. His natural instinct was to try and find someplace to wait for us, as it was obvious at this point that he'd passed us up. He tried to bully his way into a room at the tavern, but was mocked by an elderly man. He then tried to sneak into a barn and sleep there, but was caught by the same old man, who at this point told him to leave or have the town guard called on him. Well, he decided that it might somehow be a good idea to steal the man's walking stick (which he successfully did) and attack him in an attempt to knock him out. Sadly, his roll wasn't ideal, so he ended up causing the old man to trip, fall, and crack his head open on a stone. Our missing party member had now just murdered an old man.
We eventually met up with him, he sheepishly called two of us over to show what had happened (the rest of the party more likely to react more negatively), and we agreed to help dispose of the body, which went off without incident. As a grim reminder, he kept the walking stick, which later on managed to get some crazy crits and one-hit a few enemies. He and the DM agreed that if he kept one-hitting things with the stick, it would become cursed, absorb the souls of anything it one-hit, and grow in power, but his character would gradually become evil as a result (something which wouldn't play too well with our party, as we had two lawful goods who would definitely PVP if this happened). It was pretty neat.
Soooo.. you make a point of _"you can do whatever you want"_ , and even put that in big text on the screen. But when "Steve" wanted to finish the quest they were on initially, that was somehow "wrong"? Kind of weird to teach the message that you can do whatever you want, in a game where you were heavily trying to railroad your party to the goblin camp.
My initial reaction:
"Remember what we all talked about in Session 0, Stevie boy."
If he did not attend session zero:
"You should've attended Session 0, Stevie boy."
Proxy session zero probably wasn't a thing
Marcar9 Marcar9
Ah, well in that case I'll probably then explain to Steve the analogy of dnd to a movie:
- The PCs are the actors: your jobs are to play/act/roleplay through the story/movie. Your scripts are adlib and so are your own scenes, but not without consequences to whatever you choose to say or do. Everything else will be scripted and controlled by me, the DM.
- I, the DM, am the director (+ writer in some cases): my job is to know everything in the game/movie and ensure everything flows smoothly and the experience is enjoyable, while keeping everything held together within the boundaries of some/most of the PHB rules, if not all. Otherwise, the game would break and everyone would have a bad time with the game/movie.
I would say all this with a straight face and one eye twitching out of inner irritation, haha.
If you weren't present for Session 0, then you aren't playing in Session 1. Period.
@@milesmatheson1142 Seems bit harsh if they can get the information afterwards or beforehand.
Hi Chadwick strongpants. Have you used your ultimate power to make a UA-cam account?
Growing up, I would have jumped at the chance to get into D&D but it never came. Thankfully I started working with a group of guys who did have D&D experience and we got a group going. It is a great stress reliever. We had to take a break when our work changed our schedules, but we will be getting our group back together soon. We are all happy about that
this is actually a bunch of really important lessons for a DM to learn. I remember when the first one clicked for me: after my first ever adventure (narrow focus mostly in one large town and the surrounding lands) the party got their hands on a pirate ship and then... what then? they finaly solved their income problems, the BBEG of adventure one was dead and they could go anywhere. I deliberately didn't give them any plothooks for the first day of adventuring just to see their plan and they had a million options, but chosing just one was impossible. "think about all the stuff we might miss if we do this". Sometimes 3 choices is a lot better than 300. really depends on your players and how experienced they are though. yeah, DMing is kind of hard.
DMs in D&D don't give people fast transportation right away, oh, no! The old-edition Basic, Expert, Companion, Master and Immortal boxed sets, which may seem very strange to the players of D&D editions today, had a progressive system where characters at the first few levels had only short trips to dungeon crawls. In a dungeon, the number of options are kept manageably low through simple geometry: go left, go right, go straight. Later on as players build experience they can go on "hexcrawls", trips across-country to see new lands, meet interesting foreign people and kill a few. Then they might get fast travel not only across the world but across different dimensions and realms. By that time their power-levels are such that they have huge numbers of followers and can eat continents for breakfast! (Extensive mass-combat rules called The War Machine and The Siege Machine were included, one of the best features of Boxed D&D, also published in a single all-in-one hardcover called the D&D Cyclopedia.)
Oh that wasnt right away, the first adventure took us a year, I guess adventure isnt the word for it, sorry bout that, in D&D we would have been around 10th level I guess. Was rather me being like, damm that went well, I am amazing now let me try to take on something 10 times bigger with way more moving parts and I was hopelessly overwhelmed. Wasn't dnd either it was DSA/TDE but yeah you are totaly right, I read around 200 pages worth of stuff about nautical warfare and felt ready but it wasn't so much the combat rules that slowed us down more the scope of the adventure.
In Traveller RPG, which deals in entire star-systems, the principle is "Map Only As Really Needed". You can also "wing it" and stick things into the official map later. A DMs mind is an incredibly supple thing (as well as very, very evil.)
I'm currently running this module and the players can deliver the cart to Phandulin first without checking out the goblin trail no problem. There's a paragraph that says skip to chapter 2 if the party decides to finish their job first. The party might decide to come back later. It's not essential for them to go, and even without their employer they can still get paid.
The GM is on the players side. He/she is just the adjudicator and world portal, and wants the players to succeed.
ithinkitsaurus I don't think he wants them to succeed. He wants them to play and have fun, no matter the result.
but do I want the players to succeed or do I wanna be an asshole. I have a tarrasque in my back pocket and it wants to get out.
I would explain that a DM is a Story Teller, not an omnipotent god who's out to kill the party for their own amusement. If the DM changes the type of magic item, or makes more enemies to fight. It's for the purpose of making a better story.
As a noob, this is historically accurate.
I had a few new players that suggested killing random people to take their stuff. Luckily none of them actually did it.
Paul Gaudet In my first campaign, I conned the others into attacking a traveling caravan, steal their goods, capture survivors and then sell them as slaves.
I was the only new player. I think that I ended up as chaotic evil for that.
I would need a home or base first. >.> So I could keep the cute once for myself. ^.^
I bought a year ago that starter set and played with my friends all not knowing anything. I let one of my friends to dm and we didn't chase the goblins we unanimously agreed to go to town and deliver the stuff xD. Later we had to go back
"you need your employers signature."
no we dont, cos this all here is ours you see. we are our own employer and we would like to sell all this junk to you guys and so we dont need anyones signature. Im not charging into a goblins nest.
Ran into this before and im like wtf people its a plot railroad/adventure hook. I had the characters get arrested in town for stealing the merchants cart, and they were suspects in his murder and had all their gear taken. They then had to prove their innocence by finding the real murderer. Now I run the starter set and have all the merchants supplies taken by the goblins. I find a large number of the official dnd modules have serious game breaking problems like this, omg I mean has anyone ever done Chelimber?
"How do I know you're not making it up?" ..... "I am" is the first reply that comes to mind.
I started learning DM at 8 years old using super simplified rules but building the story building exp. In my experiences a DM is not there to stop or kill the players. Instead to evaluate them and challenge them. If they are seemingly over powered change a group of goblins to a troll. This room has many traps. No one is good at trap evasion or detection. Reduce traps or make them already active to avoid needing the detection checks. Perhaps a derpy goblin runs at you and sets some of them off making a clearish path.
Its best to push them in and out of comfort zones. Dont push the characters out of the story be a puppet master and pull them and make them dance.
One time i did make a fight a little to hard. So a larger enemy took a large swing knocking the cieling supports in a mine. Every one had next turn to clear out and i removed the enemies (most of them) from play. However this opened up a new path a cavern. Improv DM can be hard but very rewarding. Although one character did die in the new cavern. The origional engagement could have been the end to them.
ah... reminds me of my first dnd session...
my mom decided her character whould flash the goblin and rolled a 19, my dad (who was the gm) insisted that we specify whether we pushed or pulled the doors,
and my sister missed the third session....
good times...
This is exactly how our group played this adventure too. We fought the Goblins, nearly died, then went to town, never followed the goblins tracks. So funny to know another group did it too.
And my response to Steve is, we are using this first quest so everyone can learn the rules of the game, but after that you will have total freedom of action for your character. I'm hoping you will look at your motivations on your character sheet and play to those as faithfully as you can, and I in turn will represent the world and all the npc's as faithfully as I can so we can create an epic hero story together.
thats a good explanation of the first time railroad
Did you attempt to kill & rob the mayor, too?
😂
A little bit, it seemed to us that the Mayor was bad for the town, so we ran him out.
Yeah if you keep up your end of a bargain then get robbed as they wont pay up I might just take those wares someplace else, or turn on the thieving mayor.
Um, TJ, I don't know if you were contractually obligated, but leaving the game playing on the right side of the screen during the whole video is going to distract the watchers from listening to your story. And it's especially going to distract from the animations you took the time to make.
So, maybe you should just promote the game at the beginning of the video for whatever length you think is appropriate.
At least that's my opinion.
Hey James. I think you've got a point there. I should re-evaluate on the way I do my future sponsored videos.
I agree.
Agreed. I found it very distracting.
The best way to do a sponsored video (from someone who despises sponsored videos) is either a short mention at the beginning of a video, or more preferably at the end.
Oh my gosh, senpai noticed me. (lol) I should've seriously left a positive message at the end though, sorry about that. So I'll just do it now.
Thank you very much for making your videos, they're very helpful and clarify a lot of things that might confuse starting GMs and/or players. And I think it's damn awesome that you make your animations yourself.
I would react by thinking "Steve is not hit by analysis paralysis, he is just a Malkavian", then say he was going on this old lady murdering spree by his own choice, and throw him the lifeline that the party needs some kind of adventuring job to pay for their daily necessities (food, water, clothes, hygene, equipment maintenance, etc).
KaiserAfini
Analysis paralysis. That is a good one!
KaiserAfini
> Malkavian
I like you.
They had a job, completed it, now they wont pay up. Understandable why he pays back eye for an eye. He was almost killed by goblins only to be robbed. All things seek balance, it's the simple push and pull of the universe. The golden rule of the DMs actions.
"The tarrasque, a creature who's hide can even deflect magic missiles"
Me: I mean a level one wizard can do that too, it's not a big deal
Also i would have the old lady mayor be a retired level 9 sun soul monk and that's the reason she's the mayor. nobody in town would ever dream to mess with her and thats why they hold her in such high regard. i'd just let him make the attack but when she ironshirts the attack and takes no damage and he's calling bs on the call the mayor just fries him with a bolt and tells him to come back in 90 years when he's a threat.
Your level one wizard can stop magic missiles. The tarrasque's hide can return them to the caster (only dealing damage if they don't pop shield)
To quote Avdol: "You're ten years too early to defeat me."
Level 1 players don't even require a level 9 soul monk to be defeated, the mayor could be like a level 3 cleric or some shit and just have somebody, like a town guard, step in several rounds into the combat if the rest of the party chooses to back up the murder hobo player.
Your videos are fantastic and I am so grateful for them. Thank you for taking the time to produce this series. I especially liked this video, as it's a good reminder that players in a campaign setting should have more important, long-term goals that impact their character's lives and the environment within which they live.
6:15
"How do we know that you're not cheating or just making it up?"
Making it up? Making it up!? This is Dungeons and Dragons! Making it up is the entire point! It's a game that you make up, based on an established rule-set! And as the Dungeon Master, it is my right to bend this imaginary world we have created to my every whim, and it is my responsibility to do so in such manner as to provide you, the players, with amusement, challenge, and consequences. It is my responsibility to construct a game which is compelling, intriguing, and laced with the fear that you may not succeed, for there is nothing, I say there is nothing worse than a campaign so insultingly easy and without consequence that the players can sleepwalk through it. And I do this all by making things up! Mostly based on this module, of course, but perhaps I will take some liberties if I consider it beneficial. Perhaps if I suspect you will breeze through an encounter, I will make it harder, or if I think an encounter will discourage you unecessarily, I will make it easier. This is one of the many ways in which a dungeon master must take control of the world in order to provide the best experience to the players.
This was genuinely helpful. I have a player like this in my current campaign, but he's improved ALOT since when we started. Now he just comes across as Chaotic Good, rather than overwhelmed by choice and not understanding what he wants for his character at a given moment.
To answer the question...
If all the players were absolute beginners, I would probably react the same way you did, doing my very best to point them at the intended storyline and explaining in-depth why things are the way they are. I'm aware it can be infuriating, but if it is their first DnD experience it has to have a happy ending, otherwise they would consider the game too difficult to process and play.
If the majority of players are familiar with the concept of DnD, I would have allowed them to do whatever they wanted and face the consequences, even if it means de-railing the campaign completely until I would have them fight a group of bounty hunters they could not possibly defeat (... so they all end up dead.)
You're an awesome DM! I've watched several of your videos and you always take the time to try to work with the players and then think about things after the game. It takes a good DM to actually consider things rather than just beat the players into their way of thinking. Kudos.
3:42 *Herme's bureaucrat song from Futurama starts playing*
everyone say "JAMAICA!"
According to the DM they did make the right choice as the object of the game was to make money that's why they took that job in the first place. For some reason the town wont pay up. lol
How i literally ended the world in my campaign: so I got a spell that allowed me to enchant objects with spells activated by means of my choosing. I chose a spell that expended the object and made it rain that object for 1 minute. The thing was, I set the trigger to when the rock hit the ground. So it rained these rocks and the raining rocks turned into more raining rocks. And within the hour, the world was over
When you can do anything, the choice paralysis is daunting. For new people or casual people, it's better to give them a couple options and go from there. Or don't let them in the city if they don't have their employer because why would the guards open up their gates to strangers without the proper papers. Veterans might use a forgery skill at that point, but casual or new players would be more likely to go back to the story.
Choice paralysis is completely irrelevant from this story, despite what the video claims. The "problem" here is that the DM didn't like the choices "Steve" made. The DM claims you can do anything, but when Steve wanted to NOT go to the mine but instead to the village to finish their quest, that apparently wasn't okay.
So when they get to the village they're sent to the mine regardless. Then when "Steve" is once again told he can do anything, and chooses once more to NOT go to the mine but decides to rob and kill the mayor, the DM just straight up said "let's just go back to the previous quest". AKA *Let's get back onto my pre-planned railroad.*
But no, obviously "Steve" had "choice paralysis" because when "he could do anything" he couldn't choose. /s
(tl;dr: Can't blame your player for choice paralysis if there's only 1 choice.)
I would have explained him that the DM is on the same side as the players and his job is not to defeat the players but to see them succed. The second thing is, right at the start when he ask "but why do I need gold / why did I accept this mission" I would have said "I don't know, WHY did you accept this mission Steve? The setting of this game that you did, now tell me why." Putting people on the spot like that tends to make them think real hard about why would they be there.
The DM gets away with more stuff because they're the one who agreed to do the hard part of the game. The players micromanage their characters and possibly a very small number of followers or pets. The DM has to micromanage all enemies and allies within arms reach of the party and macromanage all existence in the entire game world.
The DM also has to come up with a story compelling enough to the rest of the players at the table that 3 or more PCs take some interest in seeing it through to the end each week. The DM more often than not has to schedule the games, make calls to remind all their players that a game is in fact happening, host game night, provide some kind of snacks or get the players to chip in for a pizza fund, keep track of any odd role playing requests or backstory nonsense the players think they want their characters to go through, potentially construct settings for miniatures out of legos/dry erase mats/balsa wood, improvise realistic npc reactions to any dumb idea or killing spree the players might pull off, and about a hundred other things that mean exponentially more work for the one person in the group that chose to be the DM.
The short answer is the DM gets away with more because you wanted to play one Dwarf with an axe, and someone else has to play literally all the things your Dwarf can potentially hit with that axe.
"Im not against you, I can't "cheat" because my goal isn't killing you but telling the story"
Some of the obstacles with Steve would be solved with a series of extra-little mini session 0's.
Employer in the 'Lost Mines of Phandelver' adventure required to be at the town to confirm the delivery? The players are absolutely going to know due to being debriefed about the nature of their contract with the dwarf before the adventure begins.
Rules? DnD may have its structure, but my adventure is constructed based on my understanding of the rules. The DM is virtually incapable of cheating, since the DM makes the final judgment calls. Dice for the DM just provides a fair guideline to help give the players a reasonably structured experience, along with the other functions.
Then... there's the existential problems with Steve. If he's only playing with his noob-level quality of understanding, he's basically playing a chaotic neutral (or chaotic evil) psychopath with some accidental psuedo-nihilistic tendencies. As the DM, I would have to explain the psychological aspects and consequences of his approach to this role playing tabletop game. Your character has a mind, with desires, fears, and goals with varying degrees of complexity.
Also, to curb murderhobo tendencies, I need to explain the co-op nature of DnD. Even if Steve was to play an evil character, he must cooperate with the party to fulfill his dastardly schemes without having his goals completely compromised. Even if evil, the fellow party members never outlive their usefulness, because such is the nature of a lasting DnD adventure.
As for anything else, I would have to have experienced DMing for Steve myself to determine anything else at present as far as I can think off the top of my head, currently.
Best experience I had with a GM who let anything happen was during my second time playing D&D. No matter what ridiculous thing the players did, he just rolled to see if the world at large or NPCs present would react positively or not. The funniest thing was when I made the wagon the party was riding on invisible but only the frame, so onlookers could see our bodies float through just a few feet above the ground with a horse running ahead. We were riding into an enemy fortress and most of our party was asleep inside and guards would just stop and stare too confused to react. Eventually after a couple of dodged encounters, the gm ultimately rolled a negative roll and the spell wore off getting us ambushed.
This method of advertising is absolutely the worst (the kind that permeates the entire video). Its incredibly distracting and offputting.
I would have explained that the DM is not just another player. That the point of DnD is to gather around and follow the DMs' story that they designed with care for the players enjoyment. In between you can do whatever you want.
I think this only happened because this was a module with set rules and objectives, had this been an open campaign made by you you could have easily responded with "I made this up" upon him asking how he knew if you didn't put more goblins there that there were supposed to be. His HP meter doesn't really matter as long as he doesn't cheat, and that can be spied upon by other players next to him. The DM is supposed to be the world, a god, as long as it is realistic then anything he says is true.
I agree about the HP thing, it boils down to mainly bookkeeping purposes. The best it does for the DM is let them theorize how wounded a character "looks" to monsters. Monsters with good INT (let's say ~14) would see that as a good target to engage, and if they aren't busy fighting someone I would likely send them that way if no targets are closer.
I think you should have started with the Adventure system of D&D if he's a tabletop gamer instead of a RPG.
Can do anything= instantly murderous
In the module for lost mines, they write out has an answer for if they go to the town, the person that you deliver too asks them to help, you should have let them deliver normally without railroading, then have the shop keeper say the dwarf never came, please go back and find him, then they can go to the trail.
I honestly don't make much up on the spot. I have many things planned, and then another bunch of things set aside for if things don't happen the way I planned, which I could feasibly add in if I needed to. If a player wants to know if I've been shooting straight with them, I am free with encounter information, though not statistics.
As for dealing with this kind of player, you can easily say, "You don't know." whenever you, as the DM, don't know.
But the basis is, you can never fully predict or understand your players and have to be ready to make things up on the spot. How do they know you aren't fudging some details? They don't know. You might be.
But to be completely fair, it is 4 on 1.
I'm with you Solomon. I roll almost all dice openly. My players know this and we all enjoy knowing there is risk. Trick is to judge a fight to take all players down to single digits and have an epic win. Yes I do fudge tactics a bit if players getting beaten badly through no fault of their own, and I do give smart ideas and play a chance to avoid TPK and escape. But players also know from events that the BBEG is an evil MF NPC, and is trying to murderize them. He will target downed characters - and they love the challenge of this. No plot armor protecting a character who accidentally killed BBEGs son in MY world! (meaning to knock someone unconscious with a magic missile on a roof, and have them turn street pizza, counts as accident in DnD right?)
Also a great DM is someone whose primary goal is to make sure everyone is having a good time and fun. If your players realize that about you it is much easier to trust a DM since one that is looking to make sure its a good experience is also a pretty honest person.
"Good Bloke" - Australian confirmed.
Not all of us Australians say stuff like that...
All of us TRUE Australians say stuff like that.
It is very common in Australian Lexicon
"Not all Australians" but as an Aussie myself, most do.
To answer the Steve question, I would simply quote Hand of Fate to him. "It would be so easy to create a game that simply defeats you. But that is not what we do here. Our rules are fair."
*Why do we let the DM get away with so much*
It's like asking asking why we let God get away with having so much power
Well simply put, God doesn't give us a choice. You must be willing to forfeit some control for the purpose of fun and trust them. :)
Assuming God exists at all ;)
+Ken Zhang Be that as it may, assigning the DM that role for the purposes of gameplay and world-building and trusting them to not kill you is important. Players trying to derail campaigns will deal with consequences of their actions. Attack an old lady, don't be surprised if she's a high level monk of something. lol
well actually that is an even more valid question.
Stormchaser9
That’s a tough situation to be sure. I’m not sure if I could have done any better, probably not.
I might have tried explaining that I have two goals as a Dungeon master. 1. To make the world of the game feel as real as possible. (Meaning that the kid would tell the guards because that’s what a real kid would do. He wouldn’t just shrug) 2. make sure everyone has fun. (This means that I’m not trying to beat you, if I’m adding two extra orcs it’s not to make your character lose and me to win, because if everyone dies then no one has fun, and if no one has fun then I lose. That’s why you can trust me.)
If that didn’t work then I would be at a loss.
After reading through the comments here, I'm a little disheartened by some of the responses I've been seeing. So I'll throw my two cents in and maybe throw in a dose of rationality to the conversation. Keep in mind that my opinions are formed from 14 years of DM'ing experience, and roughly 20 years of play time total, so I feel pretty confident in saying I've seen it all from both sides of the screen.
TL;DR - I have problems with the way you described your own way of running this encounter, but I think you can improve them.
1) One of the worst offenses I keep seeing repeated is calling Steve a "problem player." According to your own testimony in this video, this was Steve's first experience with DnD. DnD is nothing like traditional board games outside of "sometimes some groups use mini's to represent where there characters are" and I'll never understand where this idea comes from that someone who's played a ton of Catan or Chutes and Ladders is going to understand the RPG format and then shitting on new players for not getting it.
This was his FIRST experience with the game, people. He can't BE a "problem player." He was an uneducated player who was left ignorant of what the table-top RPG format entails, so of course it tainted his approach to the system. Now I'm not saying that OP intentionally set him up to fail, but as the DM it was his responsibility to make sure that everyone who sat down at his table to play had a working grasp of the social etiquette involved and of the way the game flows. It would be one thing if Steve's behavior was crass - displaying some measure of sexism/racism/homophobia/whatever against another player, distracting other players with irrelevant or rude antics, whatever. But that's not what happened here, and it really does everyone and everything involved - the new player, the game, the DM, and the veteran players - a disservice to present our hobby as some elitist "You play our way or not at all" circlejerk.
You mention repeatedly through the video that you expected Steve to ask certain questions, which would prompt specific answers from you regarding the nature of the game and how to play. I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous. This is a conversation you should have with a player you KNEW had 0 experience with the format BEFORE he sat down for his first session. Who wants to be told "Hey come play this game with me," and then realize halfway through that they never explained the very basic nature of the game and expect you to know what questions to ask about something you've never done before? Let me put it to you this way - do you think that, maybe, the reason his actions continued to degenerate was not because he was a "noob," specifically, but that you basically dumping someone who doesn't know how to swim in the open ocean with bloodthirsty sharks might have something to do with the reason he was drowning?
Would you pull someone off the street and say to them, "I need the countertops in my kitchen replaced," hand them a sledgehammer and plaster, and then ask then wonder why your kitchen is demolished? Do you see how crazy that idea sounds just be reading it? Well, that's exactly what you did here.
2) I'm not going to lie OP - you pretty much immediately lost me at the start with your backhand comment about the choice Steve's player made to continue on with their original mission, and you did so for a number of reasons. First and foremost, it's rather inappropriate for a DM to be ridiculing a player for their in-character actions; again, unless those choices are proving disruptive to the other players' ability to adopt their characters' persona and get into the game, you've really setup - perhaps even subconsciously and without meaning to - the sort of antagonistic DM/player relationship that everyone is accusing Steve for assuming.
If you're open to constructive criticism, I have some suggestions you might want to read through below:
First and foremost, I would NOT have pulled the rug out from under the party on something as mundane as payment. Again, this goes on to setup an antagonistic relationship between you and your players. The entire social contract between both groups - "You'll trust that what I do is for the good of the story, and I'll tell a story that gives you agency and entertains you" is only a valid argument when we as DM's hold up our end of the bargain. As a player - especially as a new player - if I'm getting screwed by people who are supposed to be paying me for the most basic of jobs "Take McGuffin A to Person B and get paid," then what your campaign is telling me is that nobody in this world is trustworthy. I'm going to move forward with the expectation that everyone is planning to screw me, and I'm going to plan for that and proactively work to screw them first. Maybe that was the theme you were trying to go with, but I doubt it.
Unless you changed the narrative of the module, there is no indication that Gundren has any intention of meeting up with the PC's again until AFTER the supplies are delivered; the module itself explicitly states "The characters will be paid 10 gp each by the owner of Barthen's Provisions when they deliver the wagon safely to that trading post." Not, when they deliver the supplies to Gundren or when they meet Gundren at the trading post. I'm not sure why you and so many others consider it such a wild leap of logic for a player to say, "You know what, this is what we were paid to do, we're close to town anyway, let's uphold our end of the agreement."
Instead of mocking this choice, if I had been DM'ing the session, my response would have been - "Okay, what do you plan to do afterwards? What does your character think they will gain from town?" The point here is to DIG for springboards. Whatever the players decide to do, it's not our job as DM's to "steer them back to the railroads," it's our job as DM's to work with the material the player's are giving us as they play to weave an interesting narrative that captures their attention and entertains them. If the players decide to attack a problem from an angle we never saw before, or even if they decide to approach an entirely different issue along the way, everyone has a better time of it if the DM knows how to roll with those punches, as it were, rather than trying to deflect them and push everyone down "this is the adventure I wrote/bought/have in front of me, play it!"
Me and my friends had just started playing 5e and we used these videos to learn and now we have a lot of fun together must wknds. Keep up the great work
So basically he have the mindset of "Players versus DM" instead of cooperate with the DM to have fun. This is one of these player that require sitting down and having a long talk to explain what D&D is.
EricPaz That player can also be a Socialist. You know power to the people for the people and said power must be given equally.
Let's not assume things too quick, but if that's true then it is harder.
Steve is the best player tbh. he's good for fleshing out the town infrastructure by making the DM build a justice system and a town guard in every town.
The Lost Mines of Phandelver isn't specifically designed for that. That sort of thing is great for after the Phandelver quest which allows the players to learn how to use their skill proficiencies, combat abilities, attack rolls, and healing, as well as learning how to work together with other people they may or may not know to achieve a common goal.
I would tell them beforehand that 2/3 of RPG (litterally, the first 2 letters) is roleplaying. Sure, he could kill townsfolk or the mayor and steal them. But why his neutral good perfectly sane character would do that? I would let him him kill the mayor, and then would describe the kid crying and begging for his life. Possibly, someone would hear this and try to lynch him. I would change his alignment, and haunt him with visions about it. Maybe, some cleric would stop by and cast speak with dead on the corpses, he would be arrested and he would need to create another character. It is important to tell the players that this is a role playing game. You are playing a role, you can do whatever you want, yes, but everything you do have consequences.
And every rpg game is about an agreement. The DM should agree to provide suspension of desbelief through scenarios, NPCs, general roleplaying, descriptions and engaging plots, and the players should play their characters and be willing to dive into the story and collaborate to it, in the general purpose of everyone having fun and creating a story together.
It's like there's an ad over the video that I can't close but nope, it's part of the video.
I don't think Steve quite understood the game
That's odd, I thought he understood it perfectly.
Honestly, you can’t really blame Steve for questioning the obvious consequence to murdering the mayor. While he immediately resorted to the most basic video game instinct that would be more at home in Elder Scrolls (i.e., murder and thievery), he did use his imagination to question the grandchild’s reaction-the child could have been abused or traumatized by the event, so the child may not have reported the murder to a constable immediately. But...then again, regardless of the child’s presence or reaction, it’s kinda hard to murder the mayor of a town at her doorstep without an immediate investigation. This is my first time watching your content-I like it. Keep up the good work!
I just stared the lost mine of pandever canpain (thank you for teaching me how to play)
Chase Blogs
*started
Chase Blogs campaign**
Phandelver*
I'll get in this, too.
.*
I think it goes deeper than trust, it’s what makes D&D special. When a person plays a game, some of their first questions will be “who am I competing against” and “what is my objective”? Many players will automatically assume they are competing against the DM, like most RPGs. But the relationship between DM and player isn’t adversarial-unless they want it to be, of course.
Consider the relationship between a player and a video game. The computer has a set of rules for the player to learn, master and manipulate. The scenarios can be as complex as the designers can program them to be, but the computer can only follow the parameters set for it in advance. The purpose of the DM is to escape this limitation.
The rules in D&D represent objective reality, similarly to a video game RPG. The DM gives that reality flexibility because they are able to adapt and interpret the rules in real-time, even operating entirely outside the predefined rules where convenient for the simulation.
The DM allows D&D to be what video game RPGs can never become: not a series of defined scenarios with scripted outcomes, but an emergent story told in real-time by the players themselves. When a player realizes this, consciously or unconsciously, they stop playing D&D like a game, and instead begin exploring a world they and the DM are creating together.
I am that kind of player if I attend your game. I will break it with logic if it is remotely possible to do so.
However, I prefer to be the DM. You can not break my games. Trying to apply real world logic to my games is like paying for microtransactions. You can play the game without them, but it was designed for you to apply them, and by doing so you gain so much more exciting content out of the experience. Except unlike paying for microtransactions, applying logic is free. Just use your brain a little.
If a player ever questioned my power, I have the answer I use to explain rule zero. Rule zero is "the GM is always right." The GM is the referee of the game. The GM brings the world to life. It is his job to make sure the players have a good time. If you aren't having fun, the GM has failed. The door is right behind you. You let the GM have unlimited power so they can make sure you have unlimited fun.
If they had asked about killing the civilian, I would not have even hesitated. I would not have questioned the player's actions. Rule one is you can do anything you can do in real life. Fantastical elements are added on top of that. Rule two is act as your character would, not as you would. So my reply to a player asking about consequences would be "Well what would your character do? You can make your character to be anything you want. A villain? A hero? A simple farmer? Well not the last one, because at my table, there is at least some combat."
Never in my wildest dreams would I suggest we "just go back to the previous quest". You want to become a super-villain and start by murdering the mayor and taking his wealth? Roll your attack roll. This won't take long." Obviously the mayor isn't defenseless. In a world of D&D the mayor is probably on par with a level 7 or 9 player, and will have level 5 guards nearby. I mean, I wouldn't tell the players this. They'd have to figure it out from the fact that the mayor has a sword on his side, his eyes seem to be watching you and your hands at all times, and his body guards seem to be wary of you. At level 1, odds of a party of adventurers defeating the mayor with his guards nearby are... low. But if you want to try, be my guest. Put my service to the test.
Steve... Steve, you ruin things don't you. Drop him as a friend!
I totally agree with the statement that a dm should be someone the players can trust.
I have a friend who I would be terrified of having as a dm because she has stated before that she'd like to tpk the players.
Sheesh.
if it's stated before the game that is the kind of game they are playing like in call of cthulu then that kind of DM is fine however if your friend DM's and intentionally TPK's the party out of nowhere say "a rock slide falls on the party, you are dead...roll new characters" even in call of cthulu that would be uncalled for.
I'm extremely new to D&D and was asked to DM right off the bat (only DMed 2 sessions so far). I think that Steve guy was use to games like Imperial assault or decent where is is 4 vs 1. where the big boss is trying to win and beat the other 4 players
where as with d&d i already see that the DM is not trying to "WIN" he is just trying to create the world and story , so the players have a agreed place to play and agreed rules to play by.
Wow. This was very frustrating to watch.
Also, to answer your question, Steve would be uninvited from my table. Trust between DM and players is implied, usually established outside the game. Such a n00b would need to demonstrate some humility and take a step back to observe and be mentored in the art of the game.
I would have thought taking them aside for a one-on-one session in a small dungeon or something, just to establish the rules would be better than booting out a potential convert. Let's the DM and n00b get a chance to talk without an audience, and flush out some of these problems of the n00b not knowing their character's personality and motives, and how to interact with the world.
Sounds like Steve is wholeheartedly against converting anyway. And it also sounds like Steve is pretty childish, so I'd be with uninviting him too.
He did say that Steve was adjusted to playing board games. Where everyone would normally have the same set of rules they would have to go by. Dnd is the same for the most part but is played completely different depending on different role play and rules that are adjustable. Steve may have thought that the DM was also a player and from the video he explained just a little what a DM is. He may have just been confused and being new to the game which would be completely understandable. I. My opinion if this would have happened at my game and if some other player said what you did. I would have excused you from the game for trying to shame someone without all the knowledge to know what's or how it's going on.
I played my first game on the same map and story with the wagon and goblins.
Our DM apparently knew I would want to just continue to town, because the wagon was robbed while we were fighting the first goblins, and we knew they took stuff into the cave.
this is why i cant run pre mades
The thing is, Steve is right. DMs can metagames, and you're not meant to know his character's HP exactly.
+1shitty DMing.
" but why this job"
Me: " BECAUSE IM THE DM AND I SAID SO."
Problem solved.
Because the person, DM, creates you a story and a world for you to experience and have experiences you always wanted to have or would like to experience with you'r friends, a pirate life with sailing from island to island, a space cowboy bounty hunter, evil necromancer lord and hes associates, term used loosly there, or what ever one might come up with
i love this game, i used to play it, but there are some dungeons that are so hard and more powerful than the characters build in that moment, they have to check that and balance the game, there's moments that are impossible to advance in the game
the second game is easy lul git gud
the first one is a pain in the arse
"If at first you don't succeed, die, die, die again!" :-)
indeed
lol
Dracopol and find your equipment again.
Love "Knights of Pen and Paper 2". As for your question at the end.. I am a veteran DM myself. The best answer I can think of if asked of me by a Steve would be that "I am the GM, that makes me GOD as far as your game world is concerned. I can add and subtract goblins at will. The only thing you control is what you decide to do with the information before you. If you do not like it I am not the GM for you. If you do like it that's great!"
I'm only a newby DM so my answer to his questions probably isn't that good but I would have told him that "as the DM I'm essentially the god over all in this game world, you don't question what I do and if you do question my choices don't always expect an answer, assume things happen just because and are the way they are just because" while being as fair and honest as I can continue being of course.
That isn't the worst answer--but as a more experienced GM (has done 3.5 and 5th), I would argue that there is a slightly different way of handling it... My response would have been closer to this:
"I am the Game Master, My job is to create NPCs, Creatures and introduce story ideas for you to interact with. I have my own set of rules that I take to such as how certain characters react. If you think that the Grandchild wouldn't cry or report it, I would like you to think for a second and answer me this: In the real world... what happens when someone gets murdered in cold-blood? Do you think the child would stay quiet? Do you really think that no-one would care that some official was killed? In the real world, people would care and react accordingly. My goal as a DM is not to kill you, but it is to make everyone in this imaginary world that we build together seem as real as possible. I do not intend to kill you, but the monsters you face may want to."
Bit more long-winded, but a new players need to feel like the GM is giving them a fair chance. Yes I am guilty of fudging dice, and even bend the rules on occasion.. I don't do it to punish the players; it is done so that a cool story can be made. Also its nice to see a newer DM, Tiamat knows I don't have any among my group of friends haha.
Nope, that's wrong! (jovial)
Saying you're "essentially the god" is underselling the DM's power. You *CONTROL* the gods! XD
Mwahaha-ha!
But seriously, that exact phrasing, OP, comes across a bit antagonistic. You definitely want them to ask questions, especially new players should be made to feel comfortable, and it seemed like the player was on edge in a Us vs DM team deathmatch mindset. But the next line is correct that players can't always expect an answer... at least not without a character knowledge check or wisdom check.
Or as the DM just ask them "What do you think would happen if someone did that in real life?" (about the part where the player was asking about if the kid would report the crime, etc.)
Newish DM here. I would put it like this: As the DM I make the game world. It's not possible for a DM to cheat. I'm allowed to add in extra goblins, fudge dice rolls, decide what NPCs do, etc. If you were to play Skyrim, for example, you would'nt question whether or not the developers are cheating when a pack of wolves attack you or you're robbed by bandits, would you? This is the same. I am the developer of the game world. I decide how it reacts to you. That's how the game is meant to be played.
I've never been a GM or DM myself but I've played a lot under one that has had over a decade of experience. His play-style is to adapt to whatever the players do as they do it. There is nothing I've ever seen done (And I've seen plenty trust me.) that has ever flustered him. He gives every choice they make realistic consequences but otherwise makes each campaign feel like an open-world with no rail-roading whatsoever. Of course you'd have to be really creative and knowledgeable to make it work but it does provide the best possible experience for the players.
Speaking as someone new to D&D 'n such (always been interested, but never found a group to play with, though passingly familiar w/ a large number of the rulebooks), I often get asked by friends/co-workers "Whats the point of the "DM" guy I keep hearing about?", I typically answer as such:
They are to the rest of the players what the Developer or writer is for a videogame. Their job is to create a premise (or premises) that interest you, the player, enough to lead you into the game. It is their task (not necessarily job, since that implies they don't like to DM) to build a world for you to interact with. Whether they are handling how the gods of this world respond to your behavior what is in the pockets of that bandit who's head you just bashed in. They shape the world in such a way as to provide the consequences of your actions and (metaphorically) drop the bait to hook you along to another adventure or discovery.
When new players are getting confronted with those questions it makes them very uncomfortable and they throw them at the DM so see if s/he fits into the person-at-fault category (which has a very negative light). My reply to that is: Yes, I am making a lot of this up and yes, I am deciding how many goblins there will be. As you said in the vid - this is a trust issue, mostly coming from not knowing how things work. Accepting that it's fine that someone else (DM) can possibly cheat is the hard part. That's why I have no issues inviting people to the DM screen and explaining my reasoning for every component of the session, be it RP or combat. This is simply the most effective way I found to make newbies feel more comfortable at the table. After a session or two they'll stop questioning everything and could enjoy the game with a lot of insight.
To counter future doubts - if they keep coming back long after they adapted to this kind of game and constantly need reassurance I'm going to tell them to make a choice about it. They can either accept what they get from me and trust me about it, because they already know how D&D is generally constructed, or they can find another DM. I have the patience and willingness to help people through it all but if they don't want to come forward it just won't work.
Just as an example - When someone else DM'd for me and a player was missing from the session the group, after making very poor choices in combat, complained the encounter was possibly too difficult, saying to their defense that they were missing a player. The DM at the time (whom I'm DMing now) did just what I said. He even showed the original encounter design planned for having that other player in it. Needless to say (I hope? xD) they group wasn't satisfied but couldn't complain much as the encounter was fair.
I poured a lot didn't I... hehe.
Ohh yeah - having the game footage there is a terrible idea.
Keep up the amazing work! Love your videos! Feels good you got a sponsor!
As a DM who ran this with my own group of noobs, I absolutely love how you turned that on him.
My group was a little more open to the freedom of choice, and they created their own desires to pursue the quest.
i'll just tell him that the consequences where common sense that's why you don't rob people in real life. Also about the health and stuff i would explain how me creating 2 more orcs would make the encounter more fun because an easy encounter it's just boring and the health i just let them know track the amount of damage they have dealt to each goblin and that normally these creatures have around the same HP
The problem with these players is that they have no backstory to restrict the way their character thinks. So they just want to do stuff according to their own mind and poke your adventure to see what you do, not to develop their character just to be like "if i can do whatever i want than i will go kill the king" and they expect it to have no consequences "because i can do anything". I find that not having a set backstory makes players do stupid stuff or have an inconsistent personality.
Looking back at the days when I DM'd, I now realize none of my players had any backgrounds other than, *"I'm [insert class]. My race is [insert race]. My role in the party is [insert role]."* Oh, and one adventurous player who decided his character came from a place called "Elsewhere". (No, it didn't have background to it, either.)
Needless to say, I ran into exactly what you described and we never made it out of the Starter Box.
I'll probably explain a Steve that A. the point of the game is to play a character in a shared story, much akin to one by Tolkin or Martin, and enjoy the tales of heroism we write toughether, and that B. the DM's job is to put a fair challange, an interesting story and an apropriate reward to the players, who's job is to create characters with goals and wishes that are the main characters of said story, and that a DM is asking these questions and has all this extra power to help make an interesting story.
I'd make sure Steve understand that this game is a shared experiance and effort of all those around the table, and that no one around him is an enemy. This is a simulation of a world, with a simulation of characters, and irl there is no win condition but the one you set for yourself.
"How can I trust you if you have centralized authority in this game?"
Reminds me of specific political arguments that I will not talk about here.
Dalym the difference is consent. All players enter the world that the DM creates of their own choice. They can all opt out at any point. And they can all take a break to recenter if it gets too intense but they don’t want to quit.
None of those situations are true of the real world politics you are referring to.
Christian Swensen I want to respond to your points, but I promised to not mention specific politics here.
So I will only say that I disagree and leave.
LOL. That's funny. I didn't state opinions. I stated facts. It is possible to disagree with an opinion. But to "disagree" with a fact, you must state that it is not a fact. So what part of what I said is not a fact?
He said he's not arguing with you, now knock it off.
That's a snappy comeback... What is it I'm supposed to knock off? Are you threatened by questions?
See, if Dalym says he's done, and doesn't respond, then he was in fact done. I can respect that. But to disagree without offering a retort, begs the question.
Do you want to field the retort? Or are you just going to tell me what to do?
I've had this question several times in the past. I explain that my objective is to entertain my players, not to kill them. In this case I would explain that I did make up everything because that's literally my job, that I do cheat but never in a way that punishes players, and I always show my rolls and notes on anything that has already happened if someone challenges me (CRs and opposed rolls, not content because you don't need to see what's in the chest to know why you failed.) That second bit occasionally leads to me revealing that I cheated but always in favor of the party because things were boring or admittedly too hard.