"It's dishonorable to not murder helpless people in the street for literally no reason at all" my word... that's chaotic evil loosely posing as lawful evil.
Holy crap that "fight to the death" thing is such a textbook toxic player, screaming neon light of a red flag. It's like, DUDE, usually warrior codes of honorable combat are reserved for _OTHER WARRIORS_ and not some random villager. If you're putting everyone in the Thunderdome without their knowledge or consent, you're not honorable, you're a murderhobo with an undoubtedly smug sense of superiority. Plus it guarantees that EVERYTHING is going to have to be done THEIR way. No sneaking around, no subtlety, no nuance. It's all about them and their need to be a badass. What an asshole.
Simple counter would be a "naked" fight to the death (by naked I mean no weapons or armor) against a werebear, werebears can only be hurt with magic or silver and are good aligned creatures.
"Nuance" consists of repetitive stealth and speech checks AND NOTHING ELSE, just like in the videogames we can't abide being compared to. Tactical combat has no depth ever. GO PLAY WARHAMMER REEEEEEE.
My first character was a barbarian that was big on family honor and always fought to bring glory. But when the DM threw a bunch of brained washed enemies at us, both my character and the paladin were the first to agree to spare them. My character's logic was that since they weren't fighting of their own volition, Killing them would be completely dishonorable. I think that player in the last story just wanted to cause problem on purpose.
I had taken the first story worth a grain at salt when it first came out, since OP admitted that it came from the mouth of another “problem player”. But now that we have this entire story… I could actually believe Sam did try to keep his players at his house. He definitely sounds like a brat that can’t handle a no.
"You should give the child his father sword" - dm Mike after killing that kid's dad. Shouldn't YOU give the child your sword? After all, you did kill his father. *Everyone is stunned at this revelation* "But you have his sword" Yes, but you hold the very blade that killed the kids father and more-so, you were the one who handed this blade to me. If anything you should give the child your sword. Besides, you said so yourself, "fight to the death". So will you kill this child on that principle? I'll hand his father sword back, meanwhile YOU should think about what to do with yours.
In regards to entitled players, I experienced that a number of years ago. I locked my computer where I kept my campaign notes and stepped away to go to the bathroom. I come back, & 2 of my players were on my computer looking over my campaign notes. I asked them what the hell they were doing. One of the players said that it's the player's responsibility to discover what the DM has planned so that they can thwart it and beat the DM. One of the players started grumbling and sat back down. The other said that as my CO-DM that he has every right to see my notes. I told him that I never assigned a CO-DM; the player said he just assumed that he was because he was my closest friend in the gaming group. I said that I have no CO-DM, and told them both that if this ever happens again they are booted. We continued the session and adlibbed everything. When the grumbling player caught on, he yelled "this bull shit isn't fair" & rage quit. The other player apologized for his behavior.
@@DnDDoge yeah, that's what I thought. Years later, I tried to run another game & the above player who apologized asked if he could join. I said sure, and he rolled up a Rogue. I asked for a backstory, which he emailed to me: my character is a rich noble and is therefore better than everyone else and should start at 5th level with extra feats, skills, and 2 free magic items. I told him no & said he would start a 1st level, just like everyone else, and get no freebies. He proceeded to offer me $20 to start at 5th level with the above mentioned extras. I doubled down on my No. The player proceeded to freak out, saying that I'm a bad DM, that it isn't fair, & stormed out of my apartment. Him and I are still friends, but I won't play TTRPG'S with him anymore.
@@leekonze7441 like shit my fiance doesn't even get freebie levels or gear and she puts out! Why the hell would he try to buy his way into that crap, it's literally just a game, a hobby we can all gather around and have fun... what in the hell?!
The idea of someone else playing one of my characters (beyond just filling in during an absence) is wild to me. I'd be much more willing to help a new player make a similar build than to just give them mine. You can play as many halfling ranger/fighters with shortbows and low charisma as you want, but you can't play MINE. It just wouldn't feel right!
Chris used to throw tantrums and got banned from quite a few places before their arrest and even at one point at a place called too many games curled up in a little ball on the ground like a toddler not talking to anyone
Invoking the name of Chris Chan...I was like, those are some strong words! But it seems the comparison was reasonably accurate. I mean, without the pepper spray lol
I stood away from CWC ever since I heard about the "Julie" video and never heard anything about them until recently after they got arrested for NSFWAL(Not Safe For Work And Life) reasons
Originally I had planned a post about a scary incident at a table I played at but I'll settle for yet another asshat I played with lol. Honor code boi there reminds me of a guy I played with who's character had a bad unflexible code of ethics that he would never kill an unarmed man. Sounds cool right? Wrong! He spent most of his time challenging travellers on the road to duels, merchants, farmers, little old ladies, little old ladies clutching starved puppies while orphans clung to her legs, all of them were tossed a dagger and told to fight. Having discussed with the party and deciding we had enough of this deranged psychopath, we waited until he was asleep, stole his gear and left him a note saying "We have been dueling every day in our hearts and it looks like our morals finally won," We left his incriminating dagger and informed a patrol of rangers of his murderous rampage. We heard he died well. ^^
I''ve had someone before go on a really really long (as in like two week long) ramble about how his character should get this sword my character got his hands on. Every day he'd message the DM and me in a private chat, insisting that certain items should go to certain people, and it really belonged to him, it was a longsword and he was playing a druid, so he couldn't even wield it properly, plus he had 6 for strength too, I'd get it if there was some important reason for him to have it, but there wasn't.
in most D&D games I've played in, parties would see what the magic item was and divide them - giving the item to the party member that it was for or could best use it. For instance, Magic spell ring - goes to a Magic user in the party. Something like boots of misty speed - goes to rogue.
The only story I relate to in this video is Sam trying to take OPs character. My PF dm has a tendency to use old PCs, both his own AND those of former players, to use in his games, not always doing so in a way that keeps the character true to form. I realized after leaving the game just how many characters I played under him, and how many sheets of characters I randomly made for fun, I had shared. I ended up making sure to Private them all so hopefully he can’t access any of them and use the ideas I came up with and built for his games, since by all rights they aren’t his. But that hasn’t stopped him given he’s shared art I own without my permission because I was dumb wnough to show him it via discord.
That's not how honour or debts works. 'well you killed his dad, so you owe him, pay the mans weight in gold to the child or hand over your sword' wonder how long heed be 'honourable' if he had to loose something. Gathering the gold do cud be a neat side quest do .
Usually the honorable thing is to show mercy, I also find the way he handled the situation with the mind controlled villagers to be really lame, I would revel in the opportunity to find ways of placating the villagers without killing them, for example trying to grapple the champion or corner the champion and block him using the dodge action.
They can, but only mundane weapons (unless they have improved pact weapon, which +1's them). But with magical weapons of other types, the Hexblade has to form a bond with it to get the benefit of being able to conjour it and even then if it's a two-handed weapon Pact of the Blade is a must.
@@Yojimbo16 that's okay. There can be no likes without dislikes. You may not appreciate your role in this video's likes and dislikes, but it is a necessary one.
I'm a pretty consistent Adventurer's League player and I noticed a massive discrepancy in the final Sam part. AL (Adventurer's League) changed the rules for magic item acquisition quite a while ago, at least two years back, that makes it so that everyone gets a copy of a magic item (Unless it is a consumable like a potion of healing or such) at the end of a session. This rule makes things very confusing for how the final Sam portion makes any sense.
not a ttrpg but once had someone demand me to gift them my fully evolved pet unicorn in dream of mirror online... neither cheap nor easy to get... im only and need more than just 1 purchase
"It's dishonorable to not murder helpless people in the street for literally no reason at all" my word... that's chaotic evil loosely posing as lawful evil.
I'm playing Neutral Evil currently and Holy only...against this Ahole I might aswell rebrand to good o.O
Holy crap that "fight to the death" thing is such a textbook toxic player, screaming neon light of a red flag. It's like, DUDE, usually warrior codes of honorable combat are reserved for _OTHER WARRIORS_ and not some random villager. If you're putting everyone in the Thunderdome without their knowledge or consent, you're not honorable, you're a murderhobo with an undoubtedly smug sense of superiority.
Plus it guarantees that EVERYTHING is going to have to be done THEIR way. No sneaking around, no subtlety, no nuance. It's all about them and their need to be a badass. What an asshole.
Simple counter would be a "naked" fight to the death (by naked I mean no weapons or armor) against a werebear, werebears can only be hurt with magic or silver and are good aligned creatures.
"Nuance" consists of repetitive stealth and speech checks AND NOTHING ELSE, just like in the videogames we can't abide being compared to. Tactical combat has no depth ever. GO PLAY WARHAMMER REEEEEEE.
My first character was a barbarian that was big on family honor and always fought to bring glory. But when the DM threw a bunch of brained washed enemies at us, both my character and the paladin were the first to agree to spare them. My character's logic was that since they weren't fighting of their own volition, Killing them would be completely dishonorable. I think that player in the last story just wanted to cause problem on purpose.
I had taken the first story worth a grain at salt when it first came out, since OP admitted that it came from the mouth of another “problem player”.
But now that we have this entire story… I could actually believe Sam did try to keep his players at his house.
He definitely sounds like a brat that can’t handle a no.
"You should give the child his father sword" - dm Mike after killing that kid's dad.
Shouldn't YOU give the child your sword? After all, you did kill his father.
*Everyone is stunned at this revelation*
"But you have his sword"
Yes, but you hold the very blade that killed the kids father and more-so, you were the one who handed this blade to me. If anything you should give the child your sword.
Besides, you said so yourself, "fight to the death". So will you kill this child on that principle? I'll hand his father sword back, meanwhile YOU should think about what to do with yours.
In regards to entitled players, I experienced that a number of years ago. I locked my computer where I kept my campaign notes and stepped away to go to the bathroom. I come back, & 2 of my players were on my computer looking over my campaign notes. I asked them what the hell they were doing. One of the players said that it's the player's responsibility to discover what the DM has planned so that they can thwart it and beat the DM. One of the players started grumbling and sat back down. The other said that as my CO-DM that he has every right to see my notes. I told him that I never assigned a CO-DM; the player said he just assumed that he was because he was my closest friend in the gaming group. I said that I have no CO-DM, and told them both that if this ever happens again they are booted. We continued the session and adlibbed everything. When the grumbling player caught on, he yelled "this bull shit isn't fair" & rage quit. The other player apologized for his behavior.
Wow, that's pretty messed up.
@@DnDDoge yeah, that's what I thought.
Years later, I tried to run another game & the above player who apologized asked if he could join. I said sure, and he rolled up a Rogue. I asked for a backstory, which he emailed to me: my character is a rich noble and is therefore better than everyone else and should start at 5th level with extra feats, skills, and 2 free magic items. I told him no & said he would start a 1st level, just like everyone else, and get no freebies. He proceeded to offer me $20 to start at 5th level with the above mentioned extras. I doubled down on my No. The player proceeded to freak out, saying that I'm a bad DM, that it isn't fair, & stormed out of my apartment. Him and I are still friends, but I won't play TTRPG'S with him anymore.
@@leekonze7441 like shit my fiance doesn't even get freebie levels or gear and she puts out! Why the hell would he try to buy his way into that crap, it's literally just a game, a hobby we can all gather around and have fun... what in the hell?!
The idea of someone else playing one of my characters (beyond just filling in during an absence) is wild to me. I'd be much more willing to help a new player make a similar build than to just give them mine. You can play as many halfling ranger/fighters with shortbows and low charisma as you want, but you can't play MINE. It just wouldn't feel right!
Some people don't know how much players put into thier characters. I couldn't imagine handing over any of mine.
I remember listening to a Horror story from ether Crit Crab or Den of The Drake, where the DM had a meltdown and blocked the store's exit,
same here
"He pulls a Christian Weston Chandler"
This had me scratching my head, and now that I looked it up I am left even more baffled.
Chris used to throw tantrums and got banned from quite a few places before their arrest and even at one point at a place called too many games curled up in a little ball on the ground like a toddler not talking to anyone
Sam went full CWC, you hate to see it.
Invoking the name of Chris Chan...I was like, those are some strong words! But it seems the comparison was reasonably accurate. I mean, without the pepper spray lol
And the hit and run
I stood away from CWC ever since I heard about the "Julie" video and never heard anything about them until recently after they got arrested for NSFWAL(Not Safe For Work And Life) reasons
Originally I had planned a post about a scary incident at a table I played at but I'll settle for yet another asshat I played with lol. Honor code boi there reminds me of a guy I played with who's character had a bad unflexible code of ethics that he would never kill an unarmed man. Sounds cool right? Wrong! He spent most of his time challenging travellers on the road to duels, merchants, farmers, little old ladies, little old ladies clutching starved puppies while orphans clung to her legs, all of them were tossed a dagger and told to fight. Having discussed with the party and deciding we had enough of this deranged psychopath, we waited until he was asleep, stole his gear and left him a note saying "We have been dueling every day in our hearts and it looks like our morals finally won," We left his incriminating dagger and informed a patrol of rangers of his murderous rampage. We heard he died well. ^^
I have a new drinking game take a shot every time douge says quote
I''ve had someone before go on a really really long (as in like two week long) ramble about how his character should get this sword my character got his hands on.
Every day he'd message the DM and me in a private chat, insisting that certain items should go to certain people, and it really belonged to him, it was a longsword and he was playing a druid, so he couldn't even wield it properly, plus he had 6 for strength too, I'd get it if there was some important reason for him to have it, but there wasn't.
Time for Mike to find the most amazing sword to get plot holed into giving it away or losing his character for metagaming
Morning Doge!
in most D&D games I've played in, parties would see what the magic item was and divide them - giving the item to the party member that it was for or could best use it. For instance, Magic spell ring - goes to a Magic user in the party. Something like boots of misty speed - goes to rogue.
Would of looked at sam "you know the funny thing is that real life doesn't require a dice roll. So if your feeling froggy jump."
The only story I relate to in this video is Sam trying to take OPs character. My PF dm has a tendency to use old PCs, both his own AND those of former players, to use in his games, not always doing so in a way that keeps the character true to form. I realized after leaving the game just how many characters I played under him, and how many sheets of characters I randomly made for fun, I had shared. I ended up making sure to Private them all so hopefully he can’t access any of them and use the ideas I came up with and built for his games, since by all rights they aren’t his. But that hasn’t stopped him given he’s shared art I own without my permission because I was dumb wnough to show him it via discord.
That's not how honour or debts works. 'well you killed his dad, so you owe him, pay the mans weight in gold to the child or hand over your sword' wonder how long heed be 'honourable' if he had to loose something. Gathering the gold do cud be a neat side quest do .
Usually the honorable thing is to show mercy, I also find the way he handled the situation with the mind controlled villagers to be really lame, I would revel in the opportunity to find ways of placating the villagers without killing them, for example trying to grapple the champion or corner the champion and block him using the dodge action.
An honourable thing was to put your enemies out of their misery when defeated not murdering them
I don’t think is the last we’re gonna hear about Sam
There is no honor in defeating the weak
Yes! A new Doge video!
A shame about the one shot game, I'd have found it fun with the scenario dealing with bug riding raiders :)
When you know the anime the thumbnail is from.
As someone who plats THAC0, I hope all my rolls aren't natural 20s.
The only good guy in the first story is Josh. That group is so toxic it made me sick over the internet.
Wait, I thought HexBlades could just conjure a weapon out of thin air. Was I mistaken?
I think they have to eat other swords in order to power up the one they have a pact with. I'm not 100% certain on this.
They can, but only mundane weapons (unless they have improved pact weapon, which +1's them). But with magical weapons of other types, the Hexblade has to form a bond with it to get the benefit of being able to conjour it and even then if it's a two-handed weapon Pact of the Blade is a must.
should have let Joe beat up Sam imo
Dang it, I rolled a Nat 1 and disliked the video lol.
Nuuuuuuuuuuuu! You should have rolled with advantage!
@@DnDDoge I didn't think I would have needed it! DX
@@Yojimbo16 that's okay. There can be no likes without dislikes. You may not appreciate your role in this video's likes and dislikes, but it is a necessary one.
The part to take with a grain of salt was the least offensive thing Sam did...
I'm a pretty consistent Adventurer's League player and I noticed a massive discrepancy in the final Sam part. AL (Adventurer's League) changed the rules for magic item acquisition quite a while ago, at least two years back, that makes it so that everyone gets a copy of a magic item (Unless it is a consumable like a potion of healing or such) at the end of a session. This rule makes things very confusing for how the final Sam portion makes any sense.
Someone must not have gotten the memo on that rule change or simply forgot about it
Good boi
I feel that "roll off for the item" thing in official games is a bad idea. It kinda encourages hostility between the players.
Then how should it be done?
Buttons.
Doge!!!
Not supporting sam, but the way adventurer's league uses to attribute items at the end of a quest is simply horrible.
not a ttrpg but once had someone demand me to gift them my fully evolved pet unicorn in dream of mirror online... neither cheap nor easy to get... im only and need more than just 1 purchase
Comment for the algorithm.
I am like number 69