My First Ever Experience With Chaotic Stupid | Narrated D&D Story
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 лип 2024
- Was this DM so upset that the player didn’t like the role created for them he kicked them out? You decide and let us know.
Please share your crazy DM stories in the comments below.
Don’t forget to subscribe to our channel, All Things DnD. Stay tuned for more amazing Dungeons & Dragons content every Tuesday!
Submit your D&D story here: / allthingsdnd
Join our Discord: / discord
Follow us on Twitter: / allthingsdnd
Credits
Story Source: Reddit
Video Editor: Shawn Kadian
Editors: Lonny Foran (written4reddit@gmail.com)
Narration: MyLo (Twitter/VoMylo)
Thumbnail Art & Channel Artwork: NalaFontaine (Twitter/@nala_fontaine)
#dndstories #dnd #dungeonsanddragons - Фільми й анімація
2nd story: Sounds like the DM didn't actually want the FTP to contribute as a player at all, and was using the game as a way to exert control over the player. This was a start of a new campaign too, so plan to insert a new player character later in the story doesn't work here - it's almost always better to have players appear in the same place and introduce themselves by going around the table, sometimes in-game too. The DM was setting up the FTP from the very start to have a bad experience.
Yeah, and if it were an issue of being unable to introduce a new character narratively and needing to push it off or wanted to introduce FTP to the game (which isn't applicable to a fresh campaign anyways) DM could've given them an NPC sheet communicated to FTP that they would let them play as an NPC and get their feet wet while they could find a good introduction to their character.
seems like DM didnt like the new guy as soon as he met him and then sounds even more like DM has a thing for druid n was threatened buy him simply talking to her since those interaction were his main reasons for booting him and druid herself said she didnt mention anything to DM, immature child doing immature child things. much better off without that game. N as soon as the other characters over step with druid im sure theyll face the same story
I had a similar experience except after about 2 hours in I'd just had enough of his crap. I stood up, and right in front of the whole table I said in no uncertain terms that he was without a doubt the worst DM I'd ever even heard of, let alone had the misfortune of suffering personally. And he full on threw a tantrum! Just sat there in stunned silence for about 3 seconds while I put my coat on, then flipped the table and out of nowhere punched his wife straight in the face three solid times before anyone could stop him. For my part I was just standing there with my coat half on like "what the hell am I watching?" as she ran off pouring blood like a faucet while the other two players tried to restrain him as he was just losing his damn mind. Cops were called, involuntary psychiatric hold, divorce, blew his brains out in the parking lot before the custody hearing. Just completely insane.
That was 19 years ago. Last time I ever joined a game without interviewing the DM first.
That dm is a dramaqueen.
Second story.
It honestly sounds like dm didnt really want op at their table in the first place but didn't want to say no so they came up with a scenario that will give them excuses to kick out op. Also this is just a theory but considering 2 out of 3 "issues" the gm had with op included the druid I would t be surprised if gm has the hots for druids player and felt intimidated by op showing interest in their character
Nailed it like the Romans. DM one hundo felt that OP was "pooching" their turf, and this is further confirmed by the fact OP asked Druid "Oi mate what's all this then?" And Druid was completely baffled. Couching it as "totes inapprops" is Gaslighting 101, to boot. DM is a creepy gaslighting bastard, if you ask me, and *everyone* needs to bail on that table, quick, fast, and in a hurry, before we find stories from all of 'em here, on Crispy's Tavern, CritCrab, or DnDDoge.
2nd story be like:
*FTP:* "What's going on? Where am I? Can I join the party?"
*That DM:* "STOP ASKING PROVOCATIVE QUESTIONS AND SPOTLIGHT HOGGING! I'M KICKING YOU OUT OF MY CAMPAIGN!"
2nd story:
"The other players say I'm in the right."
"My friends all say I'm in the right."
"AITA? 🤔🤔🤔"
At this point, I'd stage a mutiny against the Dm, and make a vote to ban the DM and see of any of the other players would be comfortable to get another DM to play where they were left off or to even step up as the new Dm as clearly this Old Dm is abusing his powers.
To put further salt in the wounds, slightly harass the Dm every month or so with a comment saying "ever since your gone, the game is so much better without you" and what not. This is done with multiple accounts and using multiple platforms, just to get under their skin. If hes blocking your accounts, make new ones.
Am I vindictive? Yes
Am I petty? Yes
Is this wrong? Perhaps
Is this worth it? In my opinion (you may say that this is a waste of time or it is asshole-y behavior, but thats your opinion), it is worth every single time of his rage-induced tears and for him to hear the world's most smallest violin.
Might as well tar and feather that shit DM.
I know how my DM would have handled the first story: "Little boy, roll a 20 or pass out from smoke inhalation....ok, you're unconscious, and you quickly die a fiery death. The rest of you, as the flames die down, a man identifying himself as the mayor approaches and requests your help to deal with the town's goblin problem, telling you that as of late they've been disguising themselves as children in order to cause mischief and mayhem."
Holy hell I went to the exact same place except it was halflings, who in this homebrew campaign are "all thieves and vagabonds, everyone knows that."
"Play this character in the exact way I picture it even thought this is your first time playing and this isn't the story you had in mind or I'll kick you out."
Bruh f**k that GM
That was the exact moment I left a game.
Have I ever said how much I love the art backgrounds you have for your videos? No because this is the first time I have left a comment on one of your videos? Well, now you know!
Also, you are my favorite UA-cam D&D stories teller. So there is that too. Keep making these!
Thanks for the comment
Ok, first story DOES highlight the need for a session zero. At the same time, the term "Three strikes you're out" exists for good reason.
Second story. Yes, the DM was a gaslighting egotistical asswipe that can't stand anyone not liking his forced direction when it makes no sense.
"I don't understand why the player kept doing that. I was imagining the image of a red flag and rolling my eyes in disapproval very hard!"
Yea overall creepy vibe from the D.M. In the second story. The first story should be handled by excluding murder hobo’s from playing.
The first story GM did the right thing; he was running a session zero to vet everyone, and the problem player immediately showed the red flags, meaning he'd never be allowed back. Yes, the one shot was a headache, but it did its job of setting boundaries and screening out the potential problem players.
1st story sounds like someone who plays vanilla Skyrim, like the players in the bandit story campaign, while the 2nd one is something that DMs should *really* know better than to do.
Cursive Strahd... undead calligraphy?
Sounds to me like, the DM had a certain story narrative in mind that he wanted the FTP to play out, at the beginning of the game, as an evil character. Since the FTP was not playing the evil character the way the DM was expecting him to, the DM came up with excuses to kick him out of the game.
2nd story: The DM is an Idiot and an @$$hole setting up the player to fail like that, Would have got up and him that I will not play a Patsy that I'm trying to bond with party and MY CHARACTER was being hamstrung at every Level and left
DM's red flags are not kicking that player after "redflag numbers three through six" I wouldn't want to play with a DM who makes it the other players' problem to deal with 1 person sabotaging the game for them when pvp of any kind isn't allowed.
If talking the first DM, the session was a one shot. Which in turns probably means the player was kicked out before the actual campaign began.
The first story, the DM should have stopped the session and told the play that they need to cool it. If they persist, then it should have been an immediate ejection from the game and kicked out of their home.
The second story, the DM was 100% in the wrong. They took away the new players agency on how he could roleplay and failed to give context to the new player on the other players public backstory or character info. They should have said "The Druid woke up next to Carla, the Druids adoptive daughter" to immediately clarify who Carla was to rule out confusion. Just because a new player is not with the players at the start, doesn't mean the DM should fail to share basic context for the new player. Also shoehorning them into a role they don't want to be is just down right rude, ignorant, and wrong. NEVER as a DM do that to your players, it's a roleplaying game for a reason, so let your players do their own roleplaying.
Chaotic stupid can be entertaining. The low Int, Low Wis PC with no self cojtrol, does whatever odd thing they think of and is essentially unable to learn from the bad (or sometimes good) results.
Curly of the 3 Stooges with a broadsword in chaimail (he keeps the broadsword wrapped in chainmail to protect it, so it's essentially a club)
2nd story - To me it sounds like the DM has a thing for Druid. Likely OP is also above average looking so DM viewed him as a possible threat to his chances in asking out Druid. Recall DM had created a child NPC who has wormed its way into Druid's bed. Yikes all around.
No. The OP of the second story wasn't in the wrong. Even if it's an FTP, it's poor form to make a player feel like an NPC.
If someone behaves that badly just ask them to leave.
First story:
Ok, how I fix this is;
1. Enable PvP if majority if the party wants to stop someone
2. Have consequences for actions
3. the 2 is most important
I 100% agree that forcing a player, especially a new player, to come in as an adversial character is wrong. Gms should be working to strength character bonds at the start, not test them.
That second story DM is so bizarre. Sounds like the first time player was just trying really hard to participate and the DM made up any reason to kick them.
That’s a chaotic evil champion of Baal or something 😂
Wait, the DM said you can attend one more session but that's it? Like it's some kind of reward? Not, you can attend the next session and we'll see how it goes...
Plus, forcing your character into a particular role just screams rail-roading DM forcing you to play an NPC (that they'll never be happy with the way you play when it's not exactly like they want it played) and you should run.
Yeah, chaotic evil is really tough to pull off without becoming a nuisance. You can do it, but you really need to be experienced and you need to be in the right game. It doesn't even need to be an evil campaign you just need to learn to wait till the party isn't around to start wreaking havoc and have a high enough deception to be able to play dumb when the party asks about the orphanage that burned down. "An orphanage got burned down? No i didn't hear anything about it, i've been in outhouse all day with terrible diarrhea." The goal is to make the conversation awkward enough that they don't want to press the matter any further but not so off-putting that it offends the irl players.
Yea I'm playing a chaotic evil right now and I am constantly butting heads with my fellow party members. Mostly over who we are going to fight and kill. My character also has a very destructive approach to combat although that was a coincidence because of my forgetfulness that there was indeed a wooden house behind the enemy. to top it all off after playing I've come to realise that my character doesn't really like the party. The only reason why they're still together is because it's necessary for survival in a undead ridden land.
I've asked my GM about it multiple times and he just said I was free to do whatever and as long as it was in character. The npc's would treat me as evil but I don't really care about that. I've already set up some contingency plans just in case justice comes. This isn't what I wanted but I don't think I can go back anymore. Oh well only time will tell how it plays out.
Chaotic Evil doesn’t have to be stupid in fact evil is rarely stupid. The laughably evil or joke villains can suddenly become the most dangerous because people underestimate them.
@@funnyblog100 I agree, the Joker is chaotic evil and he's far from stupid.
@@clericofchaos1 The Joker will still stab anyone he is working with in the back when he feels like it.
@@schwarzerritter5724 and yet is still a genius in his own way.
"Why would I even join the next event if I am not allowed past the next one?"
Goes in to NPC's house and starts looting the place? Typical JRPG protag behavior.
Goodness the first story could of been dealt with a lot better. Maybe it's because I'm chaotic and really good at winging things when I need to, but I can think of a ton of ways to use the story to teach how the game should be played. Kid could of just been tackled by guards, passed out from the smoke they caused, or accidentally light the wrong thing on fire and blow up (Goblin see kid light stuff on fire, Goblin knows perfect trap). The building could of started to fall on them, they could of caught on fire from something they lit up, etc etc. Sometimes experience is the best teacher, and I can think of a lot of ways to have that work out.
Last story is very simple. It is not a DMs job to create a character for someone, it is the DMs job to facilitate the player to build up their own character however they see fit. Putting him into a place or position to meet the party is understandable, but denying him any way to join the party is utter bs. It sounds like the DM just wanted someone to handle a small crux character for a few sessions and then leave.
Ah yes let's put a ftp in an incredibly difficult roleplay situation, then get upset with them when they don't measure up, or make awkward statements trying to work his way out of the situation lol
The first story should have a no murder hobos rule set down at session zero
Me missing the good old days of Astoshan haven’t really watched any of your videos till this one won’t lie 😂
I was really trying to be a good guy on my first real campaign but I quickly devolved into becoming Mr krabs. Even spending an hour under our boat with a Nat 20 and the ability to breathe underwater for an hour or so just to get out of paying for a ferry. I made everybody pay for everything so far and I still have my original set of money I started the campaign with.
From my experience just let the PCs suffer the consequences of their actions and watch them fumble their thumbs against the royal guards and a level 10 paladin
From my experience, some people need more communication more direct than rolling your eyes in disapproval and making a mental red flag.
I've had multiple great DnD moments but probably the best was during a campaign were I was playing a half elf paladin, and the other important character was a dwarf paladin who was extremely racist to elves our character's had both been forced to deal with each other for too long whether it be his thoughts of mass elf genocide or his constant racist comments my paladin was tired of it so we challenged each other to a duel. the battle that ensued was glorious both of us were evenly matched even having similar spells and items but in the end, I came out on top because of my magic helmet that allowed me to read his mind and predict his every move that same day he was buried. side note me and the player are good friend's out of game, and he was only racist for the character.
1st Story: Chaotic evil is usually chaotic stupid (and the player deserves a nerf bat to the head if they tried to say that was chaotic neutral). One shots are really really needed for vibe checks, DM did a smart here.
2nd Story: Red flags ahoy! 1) Removing player agency by deciding who, what, when, where, and how they were in the game without a single bit of input from the player. 2) Getting upset with a player for asking questions for clarification so they know how to actually play the character *assigned* to them. 3) There's a difference between wanting agency for your character and trying to be the main character of the whole campaign, and this DM not understanding it/getting upset at the player for wanting to be more than a glorified npc. 4) Either the DM has the hots for the druid and got creepy over protective, They were looking for excuses to get rid of OP, or druid and dm were together in some form and the druid lied to avoid conflict. Conclusion: With the DM being a "friend" of the OP, it seems like they didn't want them there to begin with, gave them a glorified npc that was supposed to die off so that they could remove them from the table, then got upset when they didn't and had to come up with reasons to get rid of them. Also there may have been weird things with the druid player going on, or the DM may have just been fishing for excuses, even if he/she had to make them up
1:59 HAHAHAHAHA what?! Is like they think their playing a video game! Aagh terrible already YIRBEL LIVES
Ive legit done the second story twice. I made the same mistake as thw story and it was a fail, the player never came back, the second time i completely explained my over all plan and it worked out perfectly his story was a vegeta type thing. 🤑
Hmmm I like this idea of chaotic stupid. Chaotic stupid can be easily manipulated to great chaotic effect. 😈 Yeah I don't play truly lawful good characters much but when playing chaotic neutral I like to trick others to affect my ends.
The first story:
Problem one: a player or players invited someone to join the game without discussing it with the DM (and the rest of the group) first? That's just rude.
Problem 2: The player bring s a character that is a kid. As the DM, "OK, then you're 0-level".
Problem 3: The kid starts rummaging through the QG's belongings and the QG just accepts this? As the DM I would have stopped the game at this point (if not sooner when he went to pick the lock) and discussed the situation with the players and asked the problem player what they hell they're doing? The game, or at least the player, wouldn't continue unless a rational reason was presented that everyone else could agree on.
Problem 4: Wizzy walks into the business and casts fireball? As the DM I rule that no they don't do that and again, stop the game and asked the problem player "what's your damage?" Assuming things got this far, I don't see the player continuing -- for the rest of the problems, the result would be basically the same; I'd prevent the action and stop the game to discuss it with the players.
First Story: "I don't do PVP..." That's fine but the NPCs aren't part of the party and should be part of the world to enforce laws. If the PCs don't rein in their members they are culpable and they will all be imprisoned or indentured until damages are paid. If the "Wizzy" continues to do that the other PCs have a choice, rein him in, disown him or turn him over to the authorities. In the wrong town the character would lose a hand or their head, imprisonment is a modern philosophy, stocks or hanging were more likely and any that didn't turn the culprit in immediately were also held as guilty by association.
I feel you only hear one side of the story with these sort of stories. We don't know what actually transpired here. For the second story, it could of been that the player created a villain character but didn't like it so tried to change to a hero halfway through the story despite the GM already planning his villain arc. It also seems like the player was on the edge of main character syndrome as they saw no problem in interrupting the introduction of the druid character to ask where their (OP) character is at that moment. However, these stories could be genuine and if it is I feel bad for the OP. There is just no way to verify what actually happened. Fun to watch though
for some reason I can't get an invite to your site. May I know why> someone hacked my other discord and I got a new email for that. but when I try to get into the discord it says I can't.
I want to hear about good/stupid.
So in the 2nd story, the DM claims to want roleplaying, but then "gets offended" when the FTP actually roleplays and doesn't metagame (but claims metagaming). Plus sets up the character essentially as a villain or sub-villain without permission, then says the FTP is messing up the "team game"? Sounds like the DM is a total power mad jerk or doesn't know what the Hell he's doing... likely both.
Second story sounds like the DM wanted to take a shot at the druid
Guy abused his power as a gm and to coerce an ftp into doing what he wants
Fighter if you read this that guy was a dick and I hope you've found a good table that promoted your creativity
So many horror stories and horrible players. But I have a question. When you weren't a horrible player? Cuz I was one before I became a good one. You never see videos of how terrible players actually get better
I've actually seen a few. A couple stories on channels like this where the OP eventually said "this problem player I've been talking about was me" or words to that effect. Also Seth Skorkowski did a video in his "War Stories" playlist about how he was the problem player in a Cyberpunk game, video title is "What Bug?".
I watched a video the other day (I looked in my history but it's not jumping out at me) where the DM discussed a horrible player's actions with them and they corrected their ways and became a good player. It does happen but it's rare, the DM (and other players) needs to be (overly) patient and considerate and give the problem player an opportunity to improve while the problem player needs to be introspective and open to changing how they're playing.
First storry sounds familiar - i guess every regular GM doing this "job" for more than 5 years will finally encouter this type of player. Some of them are just real jerks trying to troll the game and ruin the fun of everyone else, others are just to exited that they can do whatever they want which they cannot do in real life.
My advice in this situation. If all the table is annoyed by one player you should stop the game and talk about this. Best case ist that the player will understand and change his/her behavior - worst case there is no improvement and you have to kick him/her from your table.
Second storry could have been avoided if the gm talked to the player about his idea during character creaton. At this point i´m not condeming the GM´s motivation behind it. Maybe he got an fantastic idea behind this decision, maybe not. Directing a specific Agenda to a single player while all others could have their free choice is never to work out. There was this one time my DM decided that one of our players will be the lost heir to a kin giving him a lot of spotlight which the player hated. Long storry short to get out of this he decided to kill his character and the campain came to a unsatisfying end. So if you think you have a great plot idea make sure that everyone is down for it
The GM complaining about the player to roleplay himself into the action is the just a weird mov. Maybe upset that OP was not happy to run with his plan. This kind of situation is not woth risking a friendship.
In the first story why did you wait so long for 8 red flags
Yeah, that group in the second story was a bad group. They just wanted someone to play an NPC.
that DM sounds fat
At this point you should just change your name to: petty stories from the bottom of the dnd barrel. Yall let me know when you drop the drama and get back to actual dnd stories.
2nd story sounds like a lie
2nd story DM was garbage.
The DM from the first story isn't very good. Allow for PVP, let them suffer consequences and stop counting red flags lol
Just kill the Druid if they want a bad guy, seriously if you're going to play a PvP, note that morality is shape by in which an individual is raise at. If your character is from a place where might makes right, just become Hitler 2.0.
Story 2: Assuming this is all true, the DM is garbage.