Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
Crazy Kid Tries To Ban Me For Fighting Monsters In D&D
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 січ 2022
- Credits to u/bigwes210 and u/NenDeshiri for the stories. Thanks for sharing!
Join the Discord! / discord
Submit Your Story! / critcrab
Support me on Patreon! / critcrab
Follow me on Twitter! / crabcrit
MERCH! teespring.com/...
![Дон ДОН, Алаудинов и СБЕЖАВШИЕ из под Курска ахматовцы 😁 [Пародия]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dEfCf5IK26Q/mqdefault.jpg)
Imagine calling someone an racist OOC because their character in game distrusts the people who, up to that point, kept attacking them
This is on the same level as WotC deleting negative racial bonuses for being 'racist'
And the he delivers an ultimatum JUST to get his way. Forcing your friends to pick a side instead of asking what they think.
@@tronche2cake and then leaving the drow, duregar and kobold negatives in
Some people really have a problem separating reality from games
It is always *Reverse-racists* who are supposedly _"seeing no race"_ or even thinking they are _"anti-racist"._
Cringe fools who very often also very narcistic, sociopathic people. :)
Okay, I gotta disagree with a point here: He didn't distrust the yuan-ti because "They're evil", he distrusted them because they kept trying to kill him, and even had some that he was trying to rescue try to kill him. That's not racism, 100% of Yuan-Ti, in various groups, had attempted to kill him. His position was entirely understandable given the situation that the DM had created and played out.
I agree with you. I was kinda confused when he started talking about evilness having a role in how OP felt. If the yaun ti were constantly trying to kill him, it makes sense his guard would be up around them.
Also I'm pretty sure it doesn't count as racism anyway.
If racism applies in the case of a literal other species that is stated to be genetically incapable of acting in good faith, then maybe racism isn't so bad.
Alternatively we can recognize that other species would not necessarily share human qualities and that their thought process is almost certainly fundamentally alien to ours.
Yeah it wasn't like he did it for personal hatred they had all tried killing him
agreed 100%
Exactly what I was thinking; even if he had made the argument for outright execution of the Yuan-Ti, there at least is still an understandable reason for even THAT given his experience with Yuan-Ti up to that point though maybe still morally questionable. But he didn't even bring that up, he merely kept the blade out just in case, and even explained his reasoning, either OOC or IC
"I've met 20 yaun ti on this island and 20 have tried to kill me, forgive me if I don't immediately trust the 21st." is such a good line.
Especially when that person doesn't know their best friend is in fact a yuan-ti
@@kenziemathews926 I wonder if that friend played the Yuan-Ti like an anomaly for the "race" or if they were just as untrustworthy but necessary
@@justanidiotmk2749 it could also just be the yaun ti of the island, which the quote doesn't go for or against
@@123benyb true
Reminds me of a song lyric;
"20 men had tried to take him, 20 men had made a slip, 21 would the ranger with the big iron on his hip."
"Thats racist!" Gets completely obliterated by "Yuan-Ti are fictional magic snake people who worship an evil snake god"
Don't forget about "This needs to change because my 3 years old daughter asked me why she can't [insert] ..." people.
@@TeaSerpent fictional. Magic. Snake people. Who worship. An evil. Snake god. It isnt that deep bro its not a hit piece on chinese culture.
@@TeaSerpentyou’re gonna freak when you hear about Minotaurs
@@TeaSerpent except their actual origins is an homage to the serpent race featured in several of Robert Ervin Howard's Conan the Barbarian books. Very little of them is actually Chinese.
"snakes why did it have to be snakes".
deadass called a guy racist for distrusting snake people that tried to kill him
The nerve
Wow you have eyes who would've thought want a 🥉 🤦♂️
If you meet 20 Yuan-ti and all 20 tried to kill you, being cautious when you meet the 21st is not racism, it's basic pattern recognition.
Technically he met 21, cuz one of the PCs was a yuanti
"rule number 1 of adventuring: Always trust a flumph
rule number 2 of asventuring: NEVER TRUST A YUAN TI"- Runesmith
@Agency Menace I don't think it's fair to say "apply it to real races" instead of fictional ones. The DM created a specific pattern that can't be translated to reality. (Edit: the person that I’m replying to deleted their replies. They wanted to equate recognizing a pattern of being violent and evil from a fictional evil race to real world races, which is obviously not remotely fair to the original comment.)
@@agencymenace1090 then you're a racist. if you keep having bad experiences with a certain group of people the common denominator is you not them.
@@agencymenace1090 oh we have applied that to real races. you know how that ended up? laws preventing people from trying to contact isolated tribes of pacific islanders.
I actually have a character who's flaw is that he ISN'T prejudice. If a creature is intelligent, even if history shows the creature type is always hostile or evil, my character will always be hesitant to attack until they know for sure the other creature means them harm. It's considered a flaw because sometimes preempted strikes are needed in game, but my character won't do that unless he knows his enemies are physical threats.
Didn't expect to see you in the comments. That is an interesting flaw, has it come back to bite the character yet?
Played right, that is an amazing flaw.
Mimics must be hell, then.
Honestly with Baldur's Gate 3 I did something like that but the opposite, still not prejudiced but would put things at face value and assess whether or not to make a preemptive strike. And that's how I one-shot Karlach. All the information given at the time made her seem evil soy character snuck up on her and killed her from stealth and ranged before the fight could even start
You've just made me. Are... are you doing this to me?
Kyle sounds like the type to say "talk to me like an adult" means siding with him and letting him get away with whatever he wants. I feel bad for OP. I've known people like him and not a day goes by where I regret kicking them out of my life. I may not know what that's like in a DnD setting buy I can still relate in other areas.
Dunno, her own family, husband and friends not taking her side, and constant breakdown and emotional instability are good indicators she's a liar, or being manipulative.
Plus, she's a redditor, you should already have doubts about her trustworthiness.
@@youtubecensorship842 this is exactly how I felt after listening to too much of this story it's too single sided she was obviously passive aggressive about the whole situation, the narrative is too rigid for belief imo
@@youtubecensorship842Where did you get that her husband wasn't taking her side? It explicitly says they both realized he was trying to pit them against each other by manipulating them and it didn't work.
@@youtubecensorship842 Kyle, that you?
@@youtubecensorship842I can’t help but agree a little. If everything was peachy I don’t think a man’s daughter’s short term boyfriend is going to get him to side against his son’s WIFE unless there was a lot of other stuff going on that we don’t know about. I am so sure that there is a lot being left out here, but then it can be simultaneously true that 1) OP may be overdramatic at times and 2) Kyle may really be a toxic, manipulative person. I guess all I’m saying is I don’t think it would’ve been so easy for Kyle to come in and “mess up her relationship with her husband’s family” with an argument about fucking Dungeons and Dragons without there being a lot of other stuff happening before that.
Also, separately from all of that, the way she signed off the post - “all because I felt sorry for him and let him play D&D with us” - rubbed me the wrong way. This is definitely a “where’s the rest of it” story to me
"The crown was too evil." Meanwhile, carrying the BOOK OF VILE DARKNESS, one of the most evil items in the D&D multiverse, but that one's fine.
The ultimate reach to keep the book lmao
What's this book of vile darkness?
@@gilgameshthetreasurehunter2750 it's an evil item, I can't remember who created it but it sets out negative effects on your party i.e. all potions become useless in the area for example. Even trying to read the book, essentially drives your character insane. You can't even destroy it as it will eventually remake itself.
@@faithkurtz1656 It was the diary of vecna ( A very evil very powerful lich) and then other very evil entities added their own notes and is now a book which contains every evil knowledge of the multiverse and corrupts everything and everyone. At least in 5th edition.
@@lori0747 definitely a great read hahah
"Can a intelligent race be all evil?" If wasps had the intellingence of a dog, we'd be fucked
Holy shit, nightmare fuel! Wasps joining nests and hunting in huge packs to take down larger prey... It's horrifying
Aaand thank you for the Deadlands monster idea *note scribbling intensifies*
@@masontrupe9047 you… I like you… you are the purest evil and I love it
If Dolphins had the intelligence of a person and could walk, we’d be fucked.
@@poolturtle5772 they kinda have, just need arms and fire now
“No crown too evil”
“Aye yes, the book of vile darkness the most evil thing in the multiverse I better not break the rules”
One of my favorite characters is a goblin, I don’t get bent out of shape when he’s distrusted by NPC’s because I understand goblins are, in most npcs experience, the little monsters they’re perceived as. Mine however is an assassin and stays cordial because professionals have standards.
You should've made him a Goblin Cleric and then multiclass into a Ranger with Guiding Bolt. 😂
@@EYE1NWhy? I, I miss the joke here, but I know it's a good reference to something and lauhed and I'm just not getting it due to not knowing the original reference off the top of my head.
@@thefiresworddragon927 Sniper from TF2.
"Professionals have standards"
"Be polite"
@@destroyer4929"be efficient"
“Can I interest you in racism?”
Is such a powerful line.
As an Enclave Enjoyer...only if it comes with science and technology.
Literally the best opening to a video lmao
"All I'm saying is, give racism a chance"
@@segismundosaulalex3065 " you can't be racist with you consider humans to be only 1 Race."
I would like a racism whit the side of discrimination and a botel of twitter. 🍽️🧐🍷
The second you try to pit a loving couple against each other you become an enemy and literally nothing else. An enemy to the marriage is an enemy in all things.
Until the divorce.
Jesus this Kyle guy sounded like a complete douche, I'm glad those two got away from him. Hopefully the rest of the family will see his true colors. My support to the couple who decided to stand up to this guy, good luck out there
treat the Kyle problem with shotgun. If trouble persists?? Treat with more shotgun till the problem is no longer a problem.
@@CozyCabinLife5301 hmmm. Is that your treatment plan, doctor? My prognosis is one of great success. Your plan is simple but I'm certain it to be highly effective!
@@donshinkle5129 Problem is we are only getting one side of the story. I'm not saying this Kyle is innocent, I'm just saying it's a little harsh to judge someone based on one story in a UA-cam video that doesn't have any supporting evidence to back it up. I don't know about you, but I'm not the kind of person to just "take someone's word for it" on anything if I don't know them. Maybe it's just a side effect of what I used to to do for a living, but I automatically assume someone is lying until they prove they aren't.
Kyle: don’t try to ruin my relationship
Also kyle: tries to hurt a marriage
Never apologise to these people, it's never good enough. It's best to ignore them, when denied the attention they crave you'll find life is just better.
"Im sorry you feel that way"
Kyle: "You shouldn't be upset with me because it's just a game."
Also Kyle: "I should be upset with you even though it's just a game."
Textbook gaslighting. Ngl I want to make Kyle regret ever being born really badly.
@@leila13dnd Homicide Homicide Homicide Homicide
@@llanfairpwlgwyngyll7331 I support this idea!
That's the mentality of an abusive individual.
I'm totally mixed on that one. Kyle is new to the game but his bad actions are made to vilify him but her husband is the DM and makes way more mistakes, ones that allowed this to happen in the first place, and it's met with no emotional outburst or vilifying from the OP even though you could arguably make the point that if he done a better job at DMing then this whole thing wouldn't of happened. He's new to DMing so it's fine but her covering up his mistakes as if they're nothing but flying off the handle for a player doing something stupid that only got by unnoticed by bad DMing is such a tell that the OP isn't being fair at all about all of this and is hyper fixated on Kyle's f*ck ups while giving her husband's a pass.
Take for example how she feels entitled to list all the reasons he has made her upset but as soon as Kyle does the same all of a sudden she acts offended, as if she's allowed to bring issues up to others but those others aren't allowed to bring issues up about her, despite the fact she clearly described herself as causing a big scene about it all.
Kyle then mentions how she messed up his relationships which is to be expected, she's getting so angry about it all and making Kyle the cause of that anger Infront of their mutual friends and he's expected to just take the disrespect?
He then says she should act like an adult and just talk to him, which ISNT what she did, she created a scene AND THEN went to talk to him after it expecting him to just be ok with her blow up. She then takes this as an opportunity to bring up a failed relationship of his to paint him as a fuckin abuser, how fucked up is that? She didn't get what she wanted, he dared to claim she upset him as if she's the only one allowed to feel disrespected, and as a result she claims he's a damn abuser, referencing a one time argument he had with his ex as if arguments are typically done with manners.
So let's summarize this.
Kyle:. Makes a dumbass decision in a game with friends/family.
DM/OP Hubby: Let's it happen without addressing the choice in a way the party would be aware as should of been done.
OP: Flies of the handle, makes a big drama, points the cause of that drama to Kyle Infront of their peers, tells him why she's upset, gets offended when he says she made him upset, doesn't think he has the legitimacy to express being unhappy as she is, lies about simply going to him to talk as she didn't initially do that, takes this mediocre drama to paint him as a fucking ABUSER, kicks him from the game with his peers, and she prances off into the sun set playing victim saying she's crying.
Actually, now that I'm reading this, by her own account she is abusive as all hell. She blows up and humiliates an individual, she expects him to apologize, gets offended that the person she aimed her anger to was upset she done so, tries to vilify him as an abuser, lies about resolving the situation peacefully, kicks him from the game, and then gets mad that despite her and her husband defending eachother to him that his partner tried to do the same to Kyle? So he's not allowed to have support from his partner but OP is?
Nah, fuck OP, she's the genuine abuser here and if you read between the lines it tells. Also, how tf did DMs dad get involved in this? Does that not maybe hint at a few things when even her own family are warning their son about his wife? A hint is how she makes sire to say enough to gain pity from it without going into even a little detail on wtf that was even about and why did she bring it up without directly blaming Kyle if not to implicate him as being the cause when we all know she would directly blame him if it was in fact him who went to the father.
She's a cry-bully from the sounds of it. She's allowed to be upset at others but others aren't allowed to be upset with her.
She's allowed to have her significant other involved but Op tried to make sure Kyle's significant other wouldn't get involved as she'd defend Kyle, and she comes to the amazing realization that Kyle is some master manipulator of 13 years only after she didn't get what she wanted from a DnD game.
Fuck. That. If you've experienced emotionally abusive people then you'll know full well who the real abuser is in this scenario, it's not the cartoony cold and distance one, it's usually the emotionally driven one who thinks they can get what they want because they're saaaaad or aaaaaaangry.
God, this pissed me off more than it should of. I hope this Kyle dude doesn't come across this shit.
"dont stand by your wife" That man needs to get himself checked out and I would take a guess he has a history of breakups or divorce.
Guaranteed his own wife/Husband's mother was abused in some fashion.
OP's SIL needs to reevaluate her taste in men. Kyle is awful, and his (not quite ex) wife should thank her lucky stars. But OP and her husband need to cut Kyle AND the husband's sister out of their lives, as well as the FIL.
"You shouldn't be so nice to your wife. Trust me, I've been married fifteen times."
The type of father-in-law to be on his 3rd consecutive wife.
@@Audioworm The wise words of Finbarr "Rusty" Galloway
Imagine thinking that good pattern recognition skills is a ‘character flaw’ that they should work to overcome.
Oy vey
@@oz_jonesyikers
It's not even good pattern recognition skills, it's basic pattern recognition skills.
Oy Vei
Oi vhai
If someone (repeatedly even!) uses the "pretend to be captives" ploy to attempt to kill you, you are 100% valid to be suspicious when you find another "captive".
The thing with yuan-ti is that, yes, not ALL of them are evil. However, unlike other "evil" races, yuan-ti have willingly chosen to become what they are, and the more monstrous their transformation is, the better their standing in yuan-ti society.
Yuan-ti are evil not because it’s how their god intended or how their curse was enacted, but because “why the fuck not. We have power. Let’s be evil”
Exactly, Yuan-Ti are Yuan-Ti _because_ they’re evil.
Well....No.
Read the "In the House of Serpents" Trilogy for the setting. It pretty definitively shows us that Yuan-ti are not universally evil. Heck, even the 5e "emotionless reptile" trope is a flanderization of the Yuan-ti training their whole lives to control their emotions. Most Yuan-ti being evil is a lot like saying most Drow or Kobolds. Yes the majority are in the setting due to common conceits in the genre but enough outliers exist to show us that the culture is ultimately responsible.
Heck even the original Snake God Ouroboros is effectively a TN deity. But the shattered aspects of that deity the Yuan-ti culturally revere are Beings like Sesth, Set and the like.
I always loved them for that, I had a whole Yuan Ti civilization living in a geothermal rainforest inside a mountain. The team later finds out they're working with a green dragon to rise again... Though the dragon was using them because duh... Dragon haha
@@Mister-Thirteen think that’s basically what OP was saying but he just conveyed it badly. Yuan-Ti society is kinda evil.
“You’re racist because this thing your character did!”
“No, my character’s racist. And if you’re trying to say I’m racist against a fictional race you’re crazy.”
“No you’re racist because this race represents people of color in my world!”
“Well you never said or did anything with that race to give us that impression. In fact most of that race we’ve been interacting with are high born and in places of political power, if anything the way you played them seems to represent white people more than anything.”
DM was white, I’m white, we had a player who’s black and they didn’t see it as representing people of color. Some DMs just be crazy.
If the logic was sound I guess we'd all be mass-murderers lmao
Honestly I just see these people as terrible writers who can't handle criticism of their work. If that's your intention, make it known it ain't hard. I ran a campaign where giants enslaved an entire island the size of Australia. The players didn't know exactly what was happening because of time travel. How did I send the message of what's going on? Slave camps, caravans with every race in shackles, humans holding token political positions to indicate they betrayed their people for positions of power. It's not hard.
well, it would be racist to assume people of color can not be high born and in places of political power these people are high born and in political power therefore they can not be people of color, however, if by represents people of color you mean represents subjugated minorities with history of being enslaved, subjugated, discriminated against and generally inconvenienced at every turn then yes. you are correct. the dm is wrong.
for the dm to be right the physical appearance of the race in question would need to be described as a person of color or else there is no obvious correlation.
ideally, racism is racism no matter who it is targeted towards and how much money or power or history of being terrible to everyone they have. however the way the world seems to work is that once your group of whatever you are is in power and has been for long enough to be terrible to everyone you lose the right to not be racisted against you can not be racist against white people that is not racism we deserve it for being white and engaging in slavery and being in power. meaning in this world "people of color" have lost their defense against racism.
@@Markcrazeer The comment about the only correlation to IRL race that they could make out being for white people because of the social status of the creatures is because that's the stereotype for whites. The majority of positions of power in the west are held by whites. Without explicitly saying what the allegory is, exaggerating stereotypes of a certain group of people is how to convey that allegory. It's not racist to know how metaphors function...
I feel like saying "these races represent people of color in my world" just gives more clues to the DM being the racist here cuz damn that is a very bad thing to say without a very good context lol.
first mistake, apologizing to a crazy person , on an absurd premise
Fun fact back in 2nd ed times there was an expansion called "Orc wars" part of the "orcs of thar" gazetteer which contained rules for players to make humanoid characters such as orcs, trolls, goblins, ogres etc. Gave a lot of background on the humanoid races and why they often appeared aggressive (being forced to live in inhospitable regions with poor farming, being attacked by humans etc) turning previously "evil" races into something more sympathetic and allowing for much greater scope for role play
Lot of these rules got adapted in 3rd ed with the allowances for humanoid characters
DM sees player with a 30 ft tall Hexblade Warlock.
DM sees no problem.
It becomes a problem.
Literally no one: Shock
greetings crispy. love ur dnd stories too
Speak about game balance ... ouch
I grew up in an abusive home, and didn't know until my wife got me out of there. Now I see what a monster my mother really is, despite her niceness facade.
God understandable
I empathize. Narcissists are insidious like that, they're outwardly nice in public so that nobody believes you.
Oof, I'm going through something similar with my own mother. She crossed a line once her actions started to be to the detriment of my sister.
Has it occurred to you your wife has potentially gaslit you and you've only found yourself moving from one abusive relationship to another?
Same
You know somebody lost their damn mind, if they call you a racist for slaying D&D monsters, because you were clearly on the defensive and facing one kind of enemy. If the Yuan-Ti are an evil race, then you obviously won't be the only individual brought to their level of screaming and spitting insult after insult at the creatures and being pissed off at them. If they aren't entirely evil, would you not think that a Yuan-Ti would have established a sincere apology to the ones their people attacked?
I haven't seen the whole video, but Ben shouldn't have gotten edgy towards you. Ben should apologize to you for insulting you in the manner he did, for he had no excuse.
Saying "I'm logical that's why you can't see my point" is one of the most illogical arguments lol
That’s why this is the best way to look at alignment:
Good: altruistic.
Evil: selfish to the point you disregard other peoples rights.
Lawful: principled and organized.
Chaotic: spontaneous and whimsical.
The best part is, you can still have good enemies because they are doing what they think is good for people.
You have good point and I mostly agree with your sentiment. Although, I believe you might be misattributing Lawful and Chaotic a bit.
Lawful: Acts in accordance with, and respects/values societal traditions
Chaotic: Acts upon personal values regardless of societal traditions/norms
I believe this formulation better captures The history of what D&D alignments tried to capture.
The way Guildmasterdan, a great old and UA-camr I would recommend, put it:
Good = Selfless
Evil = Selfish
Lawful = Principled
Chaotic = Unprincipled
And also a real problem that players don't understand about alignment is that it's not what the players believe about themselves, it's how the world (especially the gods who represent those alignments) sees them as and how they react to them. So players shouldn't worry too much about alignment after character creation and should instead focus on roleplaying their characters while the DM keeps track of their alignments and how the world will react to them.
@@alexisartfeild2807 that probably is more historically accurate to D&D. I just use mine because I think it makes more sense and works better. Otherwise you run into problems. I mean, when you think about it, it makes lawful sound just like the sheeple alignment.
@@Lobsterwithinternet I agree with the first part, though I would add consistent in general, not just principled (for instance, a lawful person would likely have an organized room and consistent patterns of behavior, where a chaotic person wouldn’t).
But for the second part, I’m not so sure. I think it’s more which principles you better embody in mind and dead, regardless of you or the gods opinion of you.
@@dragonturtle2703 Agreed, though principled characters are generally consistent in their actions because of said principles. That and a principled character can have a dirty room too. lol
As for the second part, the specific principles don't really matter as long as the character values them in a consistent matter. The difference between them and chaotic characters is that chaotic characters are more driven by their whimsy and who or what they value at the time than any real consistent principles.
I spent most of that first story trying to figure out who "Jay" and "Ben" were.
That, is, funny.
I don't get it
Glad I wasn't alone in that. I almost thought that CC had done some wonky editing, but after watching it again it was just the OPs writing being kinda shitty.
Love racist characters, they make very interesting stories and the redemption arcs are wild
How is that racist, if you meet 20 pugs, and all 20 pugs attack you, why the hell would you be ok being near another pug?
I don't get why someone would even apologize for making a fictional character flawed.
The last story is a real ride. Why the heck would the dad side with some boyfriend over his own son? Also pretty telling how Kyle didn't try and amend things once he had a new woman in his life....
Scumbags like that are generally very manipulative. He probably puts on the good boy act around the father-in-law, who seems to have bought it hook, line and sinker.
The same reason my step-mom didn't believe the accusations I made against my biological mother. They only saw the side of the abuser the abuser wants them to see. Ask anyone who has met my bio mother at parties or events, and they'd say she's a great person. Ask my wife, who got to know her better, and you'd get an entirely different story. The other issue is that the abuser hasn't given the outside viewer a reason to distrust them, while the parents have years of experience with their children. You would think this means they would trust the children, but this isn't always the case. No matter how good the child is, there will be some instances where the parents had reason not to believe them. And that will be in the back of their mind. But even if that's not the case, we want to believe the best of people, and we know people exaggerate things. It's a lot of rationalizing and a bit of gaslighting.
But we can even do this with people who aren't abusive. Ask ten people who have only met a childhood friend of yours a handful of time how they view that friend. Now, compare those ten answers to what you know of your friend. I bet they'd be different in some ways than the way you view them
Because that’s how people like Kyle work. They worm their way into your head, playing up the charisma and making you think they’re a good person. And then they try to make themselves the victim and paint the opposing party in a negative light so that you’re practically GUARANTEED to take their side, even if they’re the toxic one in this situation. I mean, just look at what he tried to do to OP and their husband. Clearly via association with SIL, Kyle has made the father side with him because he’s marrying his daughter. I can only imagine what kind of filthy lies he’s fed the FIL about his son’s spouse’s behaviour.
It’s sad, and it’s messed up, but that’s the reality of people like Kyle.
@@HistorysRaven You forgot that Kyle already dragged in "daddys daughter" into it, which reiterated word for word.
Kyle doesnt need to "work on" the dad alone. He has the Daughter .....
So now get int odads viewpoint.
Daughter comes to visit you. The discussion slowly goes to the problem with the Son. Daughter lays it out thick, Kyle is "oh no dont bother you dad with this" ....
You see where this is going?
The dad was most likely asking his son to be nice to his sister and not make a big fuss out of this incident.
For anybody wondering, the spell used to cast away the crown for 1000 years is called sequester. It allows an object or willing creature to be hidden away and immune to all detection. A condition can be set for the spell to stop, and one of the examples is just "after 1000 years".
Sequester is a 7th-level spell (requiring a level 13 Wizard to even learn). Isn't Tomb of Annihilation recommended for characters of levels 1 to 11? Could he have even known the spell?
@@TheTrueBrawler My theory is that the dm being a new dm didn't know fully the spell table and what level you need to be when obtaining a spell, and allowed him to take the spell while dealing with all of the other things without reading too deeply into it. Then with all the drama going on it was already by far too far gone for him to even look back and further study the spell and reconcile the effect because everything had already gone south.
If I open 20 boxes with a triangle on the top, and each time I open them a knife shoots out at my face, I'm probably going to think twice about opening the 21st triangle box
5:31 “My husband and I started playing D&D about two years ago, and instantly fell in love. We knew that our siblings would love it too…”
Ngl, the wires in my brain crossed in the wrong direction when I heard that one.
With respect to the second story, here's a fun term to learn: DARVO. It's short for Deflect, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender. It's the stereotypical abusive response cycle, and it looks like this:
If someone accuses you of doing something wrong, deflect and say it's not a big deal.
If that doesn't work, attack the person accusing you, either physically or emotionally.
If that doesn't work, recontextualize the situation so you look like the real victim.
What the bad player did there is textbook DARVO, and if you recognize someone pulling this kind of tactic, it's a sure sign that they're a toxic individual that you need to cut ties with.
This has made so many things click for me. This is the type of behavior I I lived by when I was very young until maybe 10 or so. Something that I know now that I copied from a very toxic parent. Just another piece of the puzzle that I grew up in a unhealthy environment.
Im kinda freaking out because I might do that sometimes. Though I believe im in the right.
@@Yoshi278 Then perhaps it is worth re-examining how you handle stressors in your own life, for the possibility that you may have unhealthy habits in need of correcting.
What's really crazy is how hard it is to recognize when you're in the situation. Even if you hear a story like this one and know it's wrong you can look at your own and think "this is fine" buuuut it's not. I'm glad OP recognized what that guy was doing and was able to step away from them... at least a bit.
Whoa, I already had a hunch that my landlord was an ass, but now that you spelled it out for me, it's exactly what happened, step by step!
Thanks for sharing this!
I hope OP shared all the messages with FIL and SIL. Abusers groom allies and victims. Honestly, I would debate cutting the father-in-law out because asking a husband to not support his wife is a pretty shameful thing to even think of doing much less for somebody that's not family and starting shit.
Shit like this is why I have firmly stated to everyone I know that "Family is not who you're related to. It's who you choose."
She may have and it wouldn't matter! Kyle weasel-ed his way into FIL good graces. And those hooks will last till the inevitable! Remember his "ex-wife" and OP! Bullshitting Toxic Wastelands like Kyle inevitably wear out their welcome and soon he'll go from "being pitied" by FIL and the Husband's family to wanting to be done with him....unless and I hope not he successfully manipulates FIL & family and Sister against each other with him "overseeing", he can potentially cause the family collapse as he makes his way out.
But in the end his kind inevitably bring about their own ruin! Notice the burned out toxic losers like him around and how no one takes them seriously or trust them unless their super too dumb to live naive! That's because these's people eventually ran out their luck and have no one to turn to or parasite off of! Notice how pathetic they look because they use to be "normal" when they had someone to be a parasite to! But now their "Starving" and it's showing. People like Kyle get theirs...it sucks that sometimes a few like Kyle last longer then they should have!
Yeah i have an ex whose father told him to play power games and "get the upper hand" as though relationships are some kind of competition with a winner and a loser
@@lwolfstar7618 had an adopted brother who was exactly like Kyle. He also got me with a decade-and-a-half of gaslighting and manipulation... But eventually my forgiving nature finally ran out. I hold myself more responsible than him because well, I should have known better... Now I do
@@setojurai Bro I know! I used to get into arguments all the time (still do occasionally with my gf) with friends who had really strong senses of family. They'd just say "BuT tHeY'rE yOuR fAmIlY" as if that meant being abusive manipulative assholes magically became okay because we share genes.
Context is the most important part of encounters, if you see a Gnoll covered in blood in the middle of a human town you can probably assume its good to kill but if you see the same Gnoll dressed in humanish clothes accompanied by other adventurers you can probably assume its talking time lol.
Kyle sounds like the cleric we used to play with who would basically control the party or refuse to heal anyone. What a massive child he was, also he was in his late 20's so yeah.
for the second story: if the DM disallows PVP then that should include ALL PVP including all colluding or acting against the party because that's just as harmful or antagonistic as throwing punches
Exactly! I allow PvP and hostile actions as long as the open animosity between characters doesn't last longer than two sessions. These kind of hostile actions clearly have more long-lasting consequences
Stealing from the party is PVP.
Hoarding loot is PVP.
Not sharing crucial information is PVP.
Not cooperating when the group has made a decision is PVP.
What irks me is when some PVP is allowed and another isn't. Or worse when PVP against one player is but another player isn't. You have to call this out every time and stand your ground.
@@Mastikator @Sean Hot take: you are wrong. There are reasons to disallow direct-fight PvP other than group cohesion - for instance, because it may have difficulties to play out (in one VtM session, when I went for a PvP, DM mentioned: "Oh, great. A fight between two low-level vampires. We're stuck in here for the next hour." And, lo and behold, stuck for quite some time (not literally an hour but only because my opponent fled) we were). These reasons crucially do not extend to backstabbing.
@@user-pq5ux6ip4i I think you missed Seans point. He was simply saying that no form of PvP should be allowed, so when the monk wasn't allowed to punch Kyles character(a form of PvP), Kyles character should also not have been allowed to remove the quest item and actively work against the party goals(a different form of PvP). He mentioned the group cohesion example in particular, because subtle acts that undermine the party are less obvious than one character punching the other in the teeth. :)
@@y2a1979 No, I understood him correctly - I think you missed my point, which says that Sean is wrong and there are good reasons to prohibit direct fighting while allowing going behind others' backs.
Kyle sounds like an absolute poor excuse for a human being. I've dealt with similar folks like him over the course of my life; namely trying to turn my family against me by trying to drag them into disputes by playing the victim. Honestly, that is something that I have kicked people out of my life over without a second thought; cut them out immediately. Going after my family is a one way ticket to being branded a hated enemy in my book. Best of luck OP in dealing with that slimeball named Kyle.
Cartman was right after all lol
the fact that OP called him Kyle is a dead ringer that Kyle is not a real person lol, or at least this version of Kyle the author describes is greatly exaggerated. Shit's like AITA, you gotta take these stories with a cartful of salt -- and the more unreasonable the people in them are the more salt you take
Mr. Jambon De Pays is exactly the kind of sheltered, ignorant, pretend 'skeptic' that allows human shaped bags of manure like 'Kyle' to thrive. Not only are the behaviors of 'Kyle' described by OP not 'unreasonable' nor likely 'greatly exaggerated' but down right unremarkable. While 'Kyle' would not be the most mild of cases, I have personally known people worse than 'Kyle' IRL.
@@jambondepays1969 You do realize people are generally given names in these situations/stories, right? It's automatically false if they have a name to tell who's who?
@@alexisartfeild2807 cool anecdotal evidence, too bad it's worthless + learn to use quotation marks properly you sound like a boomer
This dude Kyle is the pure example of why you don't have to always take people's shit. People do change but we really need to accept some people are just garbage
Critcrab: take orks for example
Me: Warhammer
Elder Scrolls
Fuck them knifears!
Exactly what I thought 😂 also greetings fellow warhammer fan
I've been in manipulative relationships before, so I pray that the sister-in-law realises her situation and escapes it sooner over later
given it took the OP 13+ years to realize...Idk. However it seems "Kyle's" ex-wife realized eventually. The thing that bothers me the most is the fact that the Father in law was involved...I could only assume because of Kyle (who is now engaged to his daughter)... Maybe there is more to it then we realize but still. Family is important to me, I can only imagine what OP in the husband are going through.
I too have been in a manipulative relationship as well...I know the feeling. It sucks. Hopefully things work out for them in the end. Time continues to move forward, and so must we.
@@kndkid08 If my father had tried to tell me not to stand up for my wife, it would have been the last time we ever spoke. This Kyle sounds like a piece of... you know.
She probably likes the drama, it makes life exciting for her
@@TheRockinDonkey That would have been the moment I beat the shit out of "kyle". He's infecting my family with his toxicity and I will not stand for that.
@@kyleellis1825 Exactly. I'm not normally violent, but in this case I'd make an exception.
Ok if a character has had 20 interactions with a specific race on a specific island and all of them were negative they have every right to be suspicious of the next person of that race. I’m not saying they should attack them on sight especially if they are restrained before hand but there is nothing wrong with being cautious when so much experience backs it up. I would bet good money that the guy calling racist in the first story does so at the slightest hint of bias regardless of context. In the process ignoring any other possible reasoning for someone’s actions.
Yeah, sounds like a member of the cult of Woke.
Here's the thing, part of those interactions include Yuan-ti pretending to be prisoners, so even that isn't a surefire bet for the OP.
Also, the player’s character was ENSLAVED. If you’re enslaved by people of a specific race, you have a free pass to distrust or outright hate all members of that race for the rest of your life. This isn’t secondhand or things the character heard about, it actually happened to him. What, someone who was a former slave is just supposed to give people the benefit of the doubt when their race ALLOWS slavery? Fuck that.
@@talynhastime9343 wrong??? You dont have a right to hate innocent people just because they look like slavers??
@@talynhastime9343 Do you realize the obvious problems with that? IRL the majority of black slaves in history were held by black people. The majority of white slaves were held by greeks/romans who some would classify as white in modern days. Today almost all of the slaves in the world are being held in northern africa and the middle east. And all of this has been going on for thousands of years.
That said by your logic the freed slaves from the american south would not be able to trust themselves because the black people in africa were still slavers and enslaved black people therefore all black people should be judged as slavers, including the slaves. The africans started the transatlantic slave trade and they profited greatly from it too, it was just a different subset of the people than we normally talk about.
It is a fundamentally untenable position to hold.
Now if instead of encouraging racism you said 'any individual they know with a known connection to that tribe' it would have been a very different statement.
Okay, not gonna lie, that second story had a rollercoaster of thoughts going through my mind.
For the most of it, I would be mentally nodding along with the person telling the story, agreeing with her throughout, thinking that the other guy must be a piece of shit, and should be thrown out, then it gets to the part where she admits that she is an emotional person, and the other guy is logical, according to her.
Then, for me, came the confusion, and had me wondering, "why the hell would you admit that", then it had me remembering, "oh yea, this whole story is from HER perspective", then I also remembered, "This is the fucken internet, people make shit up as easily as they breathe", then I start to think "well, this did all start from a game. You really gonna let a situation from a game end a relationship you had for over these years?"
And then, I remembered, well, I do know people like that in real life too, the type that argues with you, thinking that they are the most logical person in the room, you know, the type of guy who thinks he's like Spock from Star Trek, when in reality, they're not, and I start sympathizing with her again, and now I'm wondering, "Am I the asshole for thinking bad about her?"
Ahh... the wonders of the human psyche. Trying to work out every detail, usually only to come to a point where you don't know whether the more emotional and sympathetic or the logical and pragmatic answer would fit the bill. I get you my friend. The internet makes situations like this kaleidoscopes of speculation, ever twisting and turning, rarely knowing for certain what side is right or what picture is clearest. Never knowing the truth or actual telling of events when you never witnessed them yourself can be an annoyance.
Sorry, this was typed by me at way-too-late-o-clock and when I am tired I get philosophical. TL DR: I agree with you, it sucks not knowing for certain.
If it helps i had the same thought process as i was listening, the whole "im an emotional person" line is almost always a red flag for dramatic people with that Karen type of attitude, especially when she mentions he claimed she was trying to ruin his relationship and she denied it but then went on a rant about how he's going to be an awful partner and potentially even dangerous to her sister in law but Kyle also genuinely sounds like he could be the awful one or maybe awful also, impossible to know unless you were there to see it for yourself to cut through the bias I imagine.
@@zachary3367I think you missed an important piece. The "Kyle is a logical person and his ex-wife (and I) was an emotional person" was a line that was, according to OP, something that Kyle often used to justify his troubles with his ex-wife, and that the OP's sister-in-law said, verbatim, to OP's husband in a text. Essentially, OP's SIL is parroting a favorite argument/line of Kyle's to justify Kyle's behavior. This isn't an admission of the OP as being emotional, this is a weapon that Kyle, as a gaslighter, is using.
I had something similar happen. A character decided we were murderers for attacking a base of people that captured him. He attacked the party and obviously dies, then had a massive temper tantrum.
Any competent DM who actually did care about racism towards an enemy monster race would see this as an opportunity to introduce a nice person who happens to also be that race - kickstarting a character arc for the racist character to learn the error of their ways
...but apparently the DM came from the High Guardian Spice writers
Maybe I didn't understand right...but wasn't one of the players, the one that left with "the racist", playing as a Yuan-Ti that also disliked the Yuan-Ti?
@Chaotic42Kami You are correct. But character arcs take time to happen--theyre not instantaneous. Both the DM and the instigator didn't exactly present themselves as approachable concerning this in or out of game, it sounds like.
I had a similar situation in which I was the DM. Both players were new, but it was the second player's literal first session ever. I had to take her and the other player (human paladin) off to the side after some heavy back and forth squabbling. My buddy, while a greenhorn of a player was super into role-playing. He expressed that any immediate feelings towards her drow were not the feelings he had towards her as a person/player. Ended up being a happy ending and a situation where things got tense and one person forgot that make-believe role-playing feelings don't always align with real feelings. Which was understandable: it was literally her first session.
Also what exactly the problem with playing racist characters? It’s just a character flaw and as long the player admits OOC: “Yep, my character’s racist and that’s disgusting, but that’s how they are!” - it’s completely fine.
My first character in RP(not exactly DnD but whatever) was pretty racist. And I RPed her like a proper racist and got some well-deserved consequences, ended up PVPing with another character(elf), who burnt both eyes of my racist. Still remember this session very fondly.
@@Chaotic42Kami And the one being accused of being racist was blind in the game, so they didn't know that the other character was Yuan-Ti. Would've been fun to play that out, oh well.
A good example of a racist learning “Not all XYZ are bad” was the show Space Cases (a science-fiction show Nickelodeon had in the mid to late ‘90s). There were characters from different races, including an Earthling and a character from Andromeda. The Earthling (played by Walter Jones, who played Zack on Mighty Morphin Power Rangers) didn’t like the Andromeda guy. It turned out what had happened was a race called the Spung (who were generally portrayed as the big bads, but at least one was good and on the heroes’ side) had enslaved the people of Andromeda decades ago and forced them to fight against Earth. The Earthling’s father had been killed by a soldier from Andromeda during a battle. The war had been over for years and the people of Andromeda had been freed, but the Earthling bore a grudge against them for what had happened to his family. The guy from Andromeda was shy and wanted to make friends, and he understood why the Earthling was cold to him. Their relationship was a running theme on the show, and eventually the Earthling was able to befriend him.
I had a "friend" like this once. He was my and my gf of three year's friend for almost a decade.
This guy used to have a lot of arguments with everyone about things I didn't know about. With everyone except me, as I basically didn't give a f**k of someone did something bad to me, so I never had an argument with anyone. However when my gf and I started dating it became apparent this dude was toxic as hell:
1. He also argued with my gf very often for years.
2. He also sent my gf cropped messages of chats with me to make her think things that aren't true.
3. He did all he could to keep us apart for years even though he knew we were both in love with each other.
4 When we finally started dating this dude started telling me that my girlfriend is mentally ill and insane and that if she feels bad I should just leave the chat and ignore her for a full day (so that he could be her emotional support) and told her that I was a sock pervert that you couldn't trust.
4. He tried for years to convince my gf to date him despite her being abundantly clear that she was in love with ME.
The last straw was when he insulted her with something she was really really insecure about, ignored her while she was crying and just kept gaming while I tried to make her feel better, and then when I went to the bathroom he bolted right to her, started hugging her and forced her to hug him by wrapping her arms around himself even though she didn't wanna hug him cause she was mad, and he waited for me to go to the bathroom to even begin trying to comfort her. That was when we realized something fishy was going on and we started telling each other the things he's done and realized he'd been trying to separate us for years.
These types of people are worthless organic matter.
Wow, why do narcissists always hate it when others are having a good time without them? I'm sort of a tangent member of a group of friends, and the narcissist of the group always complains whenever we play games together that he isn't interested in. He also always rags on the love relationship between two members of the group. He's overall not a pleasant dude to hang out with. The rest of his group are just too damn nice for their own good and are all really great people, I just wish that one guy would get some sense of self-awareness.
Forgot to mention, I'm glad you and your partner were able to figure this whole thing out together!
@@wamken619 thanks! And one question, why is that guy still a part of that group? These types of people should be avoided
@@norielsylvire4097 He's the sorta "leader" of the group, plus everyone else is too nice and tolerates his shit. Though, it seems that they never let him get to them most of the time, but they do set up boundaries for him. He's the one reason I stay as a tangent member, I can't be bothered to waste my time listening to him rant all the time when everyone else just wants to play games.
@@wamken619 I really hope they manage to realize what a toxic person he is, and they free themselves from him
To Kyle's very mild defence, that black crown actually is a potential world-ender.
It's funny. Chaotic neutral is the only alignment that always has an absolute, objective definition. That being that it doesn't have one.
First Story: That's not racism. That's the character who like any sensible person, has noticed that everybody from a specific group up until that point had tried to kill him, even going so far as to pretend to be someone in need of aid before attacking. Like an actual person, he stayed on guard because he made the connection of "this group wants me dead, so I'm going to be careful just in case this one wants me dead as well".
Second Story: Kyle here is just what Critcrab called him: a tumor. Cut him out and burn the remains.
Edit: Okay I was half listening on the second story the first time and realized I referred to the wrong person. I thought Kyle was what OP was calling themselves. Don't watch Critcrab while you're trying to sleep folks.
First story is what people claim is racism/sexism/whatever other bigotry these days: if everyone from a certain demographic has been violent, hateful and/or abusive toward you, it's only natural that you'd begin to distrust them and treat them with suspicion or even outright hostility. If you notice that a single demographic, policy, or combination of demographic and policy has always resulted in horrific circumstances, then you will naturally be opposed to permitting it to occur again. Much like how if someone punches you in the head every time they say hello, eventually you either avoid them or hit them first.
Dude has 20 knives in his back, and this new yuan it asks to use his back so he can sign a form, the fact that he didnt start swinging is miles of restraint.
2nd story is of OP abusing her friend because she didn't get what she wanted from him due to a bad decision in game.
She doesn't get to fly off the handle and humiliate Kyle, then ask to meet so they can chat, then when Kyle says she should of just come to him as an adult lie and claim that's what she's initially doing when she already admitted to blowing up initially, get offended over the fact Kyle was made upset by her admitted actions out of game while expecting her feelings to be taken seriously over something he did in-game, paint the damn guy as a domestic abuser because out of the 13 years she knew him she never realized it but him discarding an item in DnD does and him being upset she humiliated him does(???), Try to alienate him from support from his significant other in the drama while ganging up as a couple on him (OP and DM) and then humiliating him by throwing him out of the game because she didn't get what she wanted from him which was an apology after SHE took the drama out if game?
Nah. If you've ever experienced or witnessed emotional abuse you can see far more abusive behaviours from the OP than Kyle here. You have to read between the lines when these posts come up because they are obviously not going to paint themselves as doing wrong but here it's obvious to read between the lines on.
@@WhiteManOnCampus In sociology it's taught that racism actually isn't a learned trait based off of experience, but by a lack of it. Most racist people have very little, if any, interaction with the group they are racist towards, and all of their reasons/excuses for being racist are logical fallacies or stereotypes. There are even many examples of racist people being friends with groups of that race despite their own beliefs, proving their own subconscious hypocrisy.
This is not that. This is an associative bias. Like if you hated school, and only ever got in your car to drive to school, you would begin hating your car. It's the same part of your brain that forms traumas. If 20/20 people from a certain area, group, etc were massive dicks, you would not have fond opinions of people from that area or group, which is exactly why I don't enjoy going to San Francisco.
OP is definitely the real tumor in the 2nd story.
Me: Looking for dnd stories
CritCrab: Opens video with: “Can I interest you in racism?”
Me: **is sold**
Oh man I busted out laughing as soon as he said that!!!!!
"Don't mind if I do"
Me: You had my attention, but now you have my interest
Thank you for having the perfect number of minutes on your video to allow me to use it for a timer for heading to my own dnd session.
5:05 my personal take on the alignment chart is good=selfless evil=selfish lawful=believes in order chaotic=believes in freedom in the individual. (Neutral being the middle ground of either)
Literally every Yuan-Ti the party had encountered so far: *attack the party, clearly antagonistic, etc*
The party when a party member doesn’t trust a Yuan-Ti they encounter: *shocked Pikachu face*
Ten bucks says “Ben” wouldn’t like 40k
"ben" would end up dying from the brain aneurysm as they sperg out about it
@@Trebs_ Probably lol, he'd probably also be one of the ones calling people that say he's an idiot "chuds"
@@ULTIMATZEKROM Ben would probably choke to death on a 100% soy Copium binge if he tries 40K
@@ownedmaxer607 Agreed
Bruh if Ben was introduced to 40k, I'm PRETTY sure he'd try to ban it.
I would like to point out that if you go somewhere in the real world and everyone you meet trys to shoot you, its not racist (or prejudiced) to assume that everyone else you meet will try to shoot you and act accordingly for self preservation. Not saying you also start shooting up everyone, but you'd be hard pressed to trust others till they give you a reason otherwise.
it's like if you notice items you get in a room are cursed, it makes you question if others in the same room are cursed as well, you start to not trust them as easily
The problem is most racism is due to this... shootings that are covered often involve a specific race being aggressive to cops and cops reacting in self defense.
You've argued that most racism... isn't racism.
@@Buglin_Burger7878 well he didn’t say a specific race tries to he said if everyone you meet,if that’s the case that’s more causing a trust issue and thinking everyone is out to get you
@@Buglin_Burger7878 yeah nobody is arguing that.
Thats not prejudice or racism by definition
Racism requires prejudice
Prejudice is the act of holding unreasonable preconceived judgments or convictions being shot at by everyone in an area is a reasonable reason to believe their dangerous
11:18 I believe it's Sequester. It lasts indefinitely, but you can set a condition for it. He set his condition as "1000 years passed" which is one of the default ones.
I don't think even a Dark/Steel type Pokemon could shrug off the kind of toxic psychic damage Kyle throws around.
Regarding the alignment debate, I basically run it like this: Lawful tends toward collectivism, Chaotic toward individualism, Good toward altruism, and Evil toward egoism. And just as general trends: A single act won’t tip the scales on its own, but any single act might be enough to break the camel’s back.
I play it as Lawful characters are very predictable. You know what they're going to do because of the set code they have for themselves.
Chaotic is far more unpredictable, that doesn't make them bad. You just don't know what they're going to do. Many UA-camrs would be chaotic because you don't know what their next video is going to be about. CritCrab would be Lawful because most of his videos are the same, DnD stories.
Good and Evil are subjective terms. What is nature to the spider is chaos for the fly sort of situation. The Spider isn't bad just because it's doing what is in its nature to do and the fly isn't good just because it is the victim. Good people wind up on the wrong side of history more times than can count thinking they're doing the right thing.
@@screamingopossum7809 Yeah, I used to run it like that too, but I found that it's a very subjective approach to alignment. As soon as you try to apply it across more than the individual, it falls apart. If a Lawful character, who is used to following laws, comes to a different country with different laws, will he then suddenly find the new laws just and proper? If a Chaotic character that broke the laws in one country because of his antics comes to a different country where his behavior would be within the laws, would he suddenly turn Lawful? That's why I went with more fundamental aspects of existence than merely being "predictable" or "unpredictable", or goodness being dependent on what you're personally convinced of.
Ok this sounds actually amazing and I've been trying to figure out how I want to run alignment and seemingly benign actions by the players.
I should elaborate, for anyone interested and wanting more depth on my above description of how I run alignment, that I've also left room for Neutral in that regard. For instance, if you're Neutral on the Good-Evil axis, you'll happily be altruistic if it isn't at too great a cost to yourself or you'll be egoistic if it doesn't harm others too much. Similarly, if you're Neutral on the Law-Chaos axis, you'll generally prefer if people follow the same rules, but you're fine with bending them on a case-by-case basis.
Lawful: Rules before individuals
Chaotic: Individuals before rules
Good: Puts others before themselves
Evil: Puts themselves before others
Neutral: Case by case basis
If they didn't want the player to be paranoid about the race, why did they make them attack the players every single time?
This is not the first video I’ve listened to. I have to admit, I really enjoy it. Not only am I entertained by the stories, I am also learning quite a bit about D & D. Thank you very much for uploading and for the explanations!
I have to listen to these every once in a while-not that I do not like your channel (I do), but your narratives are so detailed and thorough that it catches the cringiness of these stories quite well.
Thus, why I limit my dosage of your content.
I just watched a video from Matt Colville addressing the whole "evil race" thing. I really liked his solution: use factions instead of races as blanket "evil". All Orcs aren't evil but all Bloodtusk tribe Orcs are.
Or like I always say in dnd fk everybody but humans. Gotta put those elves and orcs in their places you know. They might get funny ideas about rising up against their betters.
@@davidpowers9178 uhhh... This might be funny if you indicate it's a joke...
Everybody hates Thens... Even other tribes of the freefolk!
You need to read the monsters manual for d&d. It states that orcs are an evil race, and that's the 2nd edition version. 3 and 3.5 you can play as Orc or Half--Orc under whatever alignment you want.
A problem that doesn't exist outside the minds of SJWs that needed a fabricated "solution". Huzzah.
I've run into this before though in lesser degree. Our party ran into a group of orcs that ambushed us and tried to kill us. We encountered them a few times after, clashing with them every time while the GM dropped some very vague hints that they had their own agenda, something that we didn't really need to be told to guess.
Then we clashed with them a finnal time, defeated them and captured several of them. After a brief round of interrogation during which they insulted us repeatedly and refused to give us fuck all information the GM was astonished when we promptly executed them all.
We paused the game and had a conversation about what just happened. The GM was under the impression that our characters literally believed Orcs were like mindless animals and that we would be astonished when they revealed they could string more than 3 words together and that we would want to befriend these Orcs after realizing this. When we told the GM that all our characters knew this about Orcs already and were not particularly impressed with this information the GM asked us why our character would want to kill Orcs after realizing this.
When we told him that it was because they attacked us, and that Orcs were well known savages who our characters had no particular investment in trying to befriend the GM didn't seem to know how to respond.
He didn't freak out but you could tell he didn't follow our train of logic at all and seemed to belive that our characters had some kind of implicit moral duty to try and forge some kind of grand racial harmony between Orcs and other races. At one point he told us that if we just keep fighting the Orcs they will just keep attacking. When we pointed out that since they initiated the conflict the moral imperative to end the conflict is on them, and that we were quite content to keep fighting the Orcs untill they ran out of people to send at us he didn't have a response and just sort of dropped the topic.
There's hope for the DM. He's not the sharpest tool in the shed, but the fact that simple logic does get through to him means he has the capability to learn better even if it's a long and repeated lesson. The iron rod shall be shaped into a useful tool eventually.
@@WorldWalker128 Im not sure I agree this is a matter of Int, what I think has happened is that in certain areas of the D&D community there has been a shift in moral expectations.
Some people feel like achieving peace and mutual respect with others has become a moral duty rather than a moral option.
Basically if you encounter a group that could hypothetically be redeemed then that becomes your JOB.
This is not only completely implausable, it destroys the uniqueness of being a character willing to martyr themselves to save their enemies in the first place, as thats now just the new expected normal.
How do you not attack something that's prone to attack you first I can't just risk my life just because there might be some kind of chance that one of the Orcs might feel kind of bad for attacking a man that won't do anything
"we were quite content to keep fighting the orcs until they ran out of people"
Sigma grindset
@@Kenfren I should clarify that at the time we were under the impression that this was a fairly small to medium sized tribe of orcs.
As a DM, i search to encapsulate a couple of pros and cons to each race. For example, the Yuan-ti are treacherous, even among themselves, selfish and brutal, dealing with one is a great way of learning betrayal. But, in all their flaws, the Yuant-ti are defendants of nature, at least they way they percieve it. They see humans and other races as invaders of their sacred realm, and thatas way they brutalize and kill without dicernement.
Its a dark grey intake on their race, that however keeps the cultistic and treacherous characteristics of the species and allows the players to have that sweet evil to hit, but also the opportunity to reflect that humans are indeed invading the Yuan-ti sacred lands.
"Can I interest you in racism" is a top notch intro
Kyle is a cautionary tale that I wish many people, myself included, would have heard earlier in life. Here’s something that people don’t realize about abusers, they start to rub off on you after awhile. One of my first relationships was with a girl whom had manipulation down to a tee. I didn’t want to reciprocate intimacy? She attacked my masculinity? I got upset for her leaking conversations that I wanted private? It was my fault for telling her information pertaining to people she knew. I didn’t want to tell her private information because she had shown to be untrustworthy? I’m just being paranoid. In the end she cost me much of my goodwill towards people, and my ability to be a good person without much effort. Sometimes I catch myself using some of the same tactics she used to as a sort of second nature, and of course I stop myself, but it terrifies what other behaviors I soaked in and aren’t aware of.
It's so sad that you would say this without realizing everything you said is in fact what OP is doing to Kyle.
@@uh-ohspaghettio7826 Bruhhhinge
If she was Middle Eastern land she'd be too scared to even utter a word before getting the back can from a based jihadists
It's ashame that scum like them even exist, they make being human even more terrifying than it already is.
Honestly she was being as manipulative as anything he did. She was constantly attacking him over a game secession the dm allowed.
My boyfriend and I just had this discussion about people feeling it's racist to give negative modifiers to certain fantasy races. Our conclusion is everyone's being a big baby. If you don't like the rule, make a homebrew without it, OR make a character that's more than the stereotype. Amazing. Who would have thought that different races have natural strengths and weaknesses based on their body type and cultural background? But that doesn't mean you are obligated to only make a stereotypical character!
It's ignorance.
Nothing about it is equivalent to human races.
The fantasy so called races are actually different species.
Of course they will have different levels of ability in different areas.
Blocked and reported, you made a completely rational and sane take. Don’t you know those aren’t allowed on the internet?
Bro it's a fictional race in a magical world. I can hate those things all day because they're imaginary and don't exist. Imagine crying about imaginary magical races LMAO.
@@mercylavigne you have no social skills
@@vgamer4993Exactly.
As a person playing as a yuan-ti (who the rest of my party thinks is a human), yeah. she’s chaotic neutral and only joined the party because “She was bored.” She *will* turn on them if she finds a cute snake. Also, she has a Drake on her side, so…
“Can I interest you in racism?” Made me laugh super hard cause I wasn’t expecting it 🤣
I was in a star trek rp server once, and my character was the first gorn to join the fleet. I had fun playing her as a science officer, as well as a little reserved and unsure of humans because she was originally from the mirror universe, but she was basically a big harmless nerd who enjoyed studying new plants, animals, and biomes. Then one day, there was some player shuffling stuff that happened, and one of the new guys wanted to attack her just because she was a big scary lizard person and his character had trauma. I was actually kind of interested in some on ship drama, and said something along the lines of "I mean yeah, some conflict is interesting, but if he attacks her or actually tries to kill her he better be ready for the legal and disciplinary consequences."
The guy threw a fit because he wanted to be able to attack her as he wished without consequences, despite them being on the same side, because her race was traditionally an enemy. I left the server shortly after that, sadly. I really enjoyed her character, but the situation stressed me out.
I would think that in a fictitious scenario, consequences would be part of the fun but I guess not
I just can’t understand people who refuse to accept actions have consequences. Rather than build a story where you can either mend or sow various issues, one guy just wanted to abuse you for no good reason? Maybe he was attempting to argue in character that her race is evil and he shouldn’t be punished, but I have a feeling that’s not how it went down. What a shame, some people just cannot get along.
In a Star Trek RP I played in, my character was ordered by another player who was my senior officer to teleport a group of enemies off their ship and into space to kill them. I didn't think that was very Starfleet, so I teleported them into a secure cargo bay instead. Because, as you say, actions have consequences, we both got court martialled, (him for trying to kill the enemy crew, me for disobeying orders) and the trial was the most fun part of the campaign.
Although admittedly I might be biased, as my character pretty much got acquitted with a commendation from the tribunal for her moral fibre...
@@johnbuscher, I had a player once that did not understand consequences have actions. I'd set a temple up in a town for the PCs to visit to get information. They played the situation badly and did not get the information. I'd pattern the template like a Catholic church with a small bowl of holy water by the door. One PC spit in the bowl. The clerics at the temple took exception to it and chased him down. The spiting PC climb on top of a building but was cornered. He wanted the rest of the party to rescue him. Even his in real life friends realized that if they fought the town they would die.
Needless to say he was not happy that his PC was arrested and did not have the money to pay to replace the holy water. He had to do hard labor earning 1 silver a day to pay off the cost. The player had to make up a new character. He never did learn his lesson and after another consequences situation, I never invited him back to game.
Not to mention that'd make the captain look incompetent.
"Sir, Officer PTSD hit the Gorn officer with a rock again"
"Accidents happen"*shrug*
For me, Good, Neutral, and Evil is "Cares about others including strangers," "cares about themselves and their immediate group," and "Cares about themselves" respectively.
While the Lawful and Chaotic ends of the spectrum would be "follows the rules" and "abhors the rules."
So the difference between Chaotic Good and Chaotic Evil is that the Good character takes others into consideration, while the Evil character only takes themselves into consideration.
Chaotic Good will evacuate a building and blow it up to make a point. Chaotic Neutral MIGHT issue a warning but is blowing up the building whether people are inside or not. Chaotic Evil just blows up the building.
Lawful Good is a charity lawyer, Lawful Neutral is a criminal defense lawyer, and Lawful Evil is a corporate lawyer. There is sometimes overlap, because this is an oversimplification and PEOPLE ARE COMPLICATED, but still.
While moral relativism can be a thing for the WHY of an action, in most cases if the action harms the majority or the dignity of sapient beings, it is not a Good action.
And really the relativism only comes into play for the Lawful-Chaotic end of the spectrum, and deviations from generally accepted societal norms should be treated as "Blue and Orange" morality
Honestly I feel like a lot of people really don't actually understand the alignment system.
I would go one step ahead and say the alignment of good and evil represents the inner workings of a characters goals and desires. A good character will do good things for the sake of others, while an evil character will do evil things for the sake of themselves.
However, a good character can do evil things for the sake of others, like good characters killing for the sake of others or joining rebellions where both sides are "neutral", and an evil character can do good things for the sake of himself, like helping the party because having a good relationship with your travel companions and helping/nurturing them into capable allies means he runs less of a risk of dying during said travels and thus represents a selfish act of putting themselves first.
I. LOVE. Both of these hot takes.
To make it simple:
Lawful = Principled
Chaotic = Unprincipled
Good = Selfless
Evil = Selfish
@@Lobsterwithinternet
More like grotesque broad strokes, dude. There is so MUCH MORE to it than that. To me, at least.
@@Center-For-I.E.D.Mismanagement Why?
It just seems people are overcomplicating it to me.
I have a morality system that is literally just “if your character does is then that’s what you do” I just want to have fun and not worry about moral problems
I though Yuan-Ti had been altered by their contact with snakes to be psychopaths with no empathy. I don't know if you'd call that "evil" in a cosmic sense, but in the "guaranteed to lie, betray, and ultimately sacrifice you to snake gods" sense, it's evil enough for a Saturday night D&D game.
In one of my campaigns I had the party come across a large clan of Gnolls that weren’t evil, and the party opted to help them rather than destroy them; facilitating a trade network with the local city and helping the clan expand. This earned them a small contingent of Gnolls that showed up to help them in a massive battle later in the game. I have no issue with blanket “evil” descriptions, but it’s fun to have things like this pop up in games.
"Oh no you can't kill or hate the Yuan-ti because they tried to kill, murder and do other horrible things to you!" It is fine to have evil races in games with an explanation of "They are just evil ok?". The old Book of Vile Darkness Supplement had a good explanation on how to question what is good or evil and how to roleplay them. If race X is evil just cause, then ok. If race X is only considered evil because of Y, then that's ok as well. Its just up to the DM to set that expectations on the players.
It's ironic that a book that contains some of the most evil things left behind by some of the most vile neing in the Multiverse actually makes sense and has a point!😂
@@davidkoudelka10 wait, is there such a thing as a good aligned warlock patron? I know about fae but are there other patrons that could be good aligned?
@@joshjo9405 celestial
I just make one golden rule when playing an evil PC character: do evil shit into NPC’s. Not the PCs
@@romankvapil9184 I agree. Playing an evil character does not mean be a D to your party as well. Now if the evil player at the start wants to do something evil to the party later on (Ruling the world or what ever) then let that be known to the party so its fine.
The spell to make something like this Undetectable would be - Sequester- 7th level Transmutation - Text below for giant nerds like me:
Sequester
7th level Transmutation
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Touch
Target: A willing creature or object
Components: V S M (A powder composed of diamond, emerald, ruby, and sapphire dust worth at least 5,000 gp, which the spell consumes)
Duration: Until dispelled
Classes: Wizard
By means of this spell, a willing creature or an object can be hidden away, safe from detection for the duration. When you cast the spell and touch the target, it becomes invisible and can’t be targeted by divination spells or perceived through scrying sensors created by divination spells.
If the target is a creature, it falls into a state of suspended animation. Time ceases to flow for it, and it doesn’t grow older.
You can set a condition for the spell to end early. The condition can be anything you choose, but it must occur or be visible within 1 mile of the target. Examples include “after 1,000 years” or “when the tarrasque awakens.” This spell also ends if the target takes any damage.
There's a reason my character has the flaw of being incredibly hostile to drow elves, and that is because she was tortured physically and psychologically in Velkynvelve by being whipped and every time she cried in pain a half orc would be executed (she acted as a motherly figure to the half-orc of her village)
In my campaign settings, I do have ‘evil’ races, but there’s at least some nuance to it.
-Goblinoids are evil, but that’s because the way their brains are hardwired causes what Humans and other races would view as psychopathy to be the normal for them. And only about 1% of Goblinoids are born with what most other races would view as a ‘normal’ mind.
-Orcs are more complicated. Their creator deity did intend for them to be violent savages who would pillage and kill, but the way that deity went about that was by making it so if an Orc goes a week without fighting something, they’ll start going crazy. As such, there are some Orcs who give into this nature and become violent savages who do as their god intended. But on the other hand, there are tribes of Orcs that live in countries and are able to satiate their need for combat through mercenary work or just combat sports and live in relative peace with the other races. In fact, in the most developed country in the setting, the nation’s greatest Adventurer is an Orc and is seen as a Hero by the people. There is even an entire Orc nation that has the primary trade of War, being that other nations agree to go to meaningless wars with these Orcs so that the Orcs have ready a way to alleviate their mental problems, and the other races have a ready way to train their warriors. Also, in turn, these Orcs are ready to help defend these allied nations at a moment’s notice. The contrast between the peaceable Orcs and the warlike Orcs is so great, that the peaceful Orcs insist on other races referring to them as the ‘True’ Orcs and the ones that pillage and kill as the ‘Savage’ Orcs.
-The race from the video, Yuan-Ti, are basically near emotionless Snake people who view the rest of the world as their prey, with only, again, about 1% of them having strong enough emotions to feel empathy for others.
Great way of working that in btw.
That Orc stuff is actually so funny. "Hey uh, can you like, go to war with us?" "Bro why, we have been friends for years??" "Yeah exactly, remember how I got kinda really bad when I didn't hack shit for a week?" "Wait, you mean that happens to everyone?" "Kinda yeah, so can we just like. Have a big battle? I'm free next Saturday." "Uhhh, yeah sure, I'll talk to the knights."
@@leila13dnd Yeah.
It's almost a pg version of Bloodbowl.
@@leila13dnd That is the idea, yeah XD.
I did a isenkai setting once where, as part of the historical background Hitler got isenkaied and became a great leader among the humans (imagine a isenkai with Hitler as a protagonist with all the perks of one) and becouse of that the humans behave like genocidal nazis and the other races were just trying not to get genocided
The players had no idea of the background except for a lack of non human or human like races and a lot of swastikas 🦉
It makes sense to have "evil for evils sake" groups of enemies in a game like D&D because in doing so it gives the DM one less thing to think about so they can more intently focus on making the rest of the quest more nuanced.
I think D&D role playing is most fun when the players have to deal with "gray areas" where they are given potential reasons to side with different opposing factions who each are right on some things and maybe wrong on others. Expanding civilization vs Tribal people fighting to protect their space, industry growth vs environmental protection, conflicts over resource/land claims in which both sides have a pretty compelling case, etc. I particularly love portraying "less civilized" humanoid tribes (goblinoids, orcs, minotaurs, ogres, etc.) as either being in conflict with the players over something more complex than "because they are evil" or being mostly unaligned but serving evil leaders out of trickery, a sense of tribal loyalty, or tyranny.
@F Some tribes are that way, some not so much that way. Some have thoroughly rejected the one eyed god. And ask any soldier, the people you fight are rarely evil people, but the conflict has degenerated to the point of bloodshed, so your job is to make the other guy die for his country or cause before he makes you die for yours.
@F That's not even supported by D&D literature since at least the 3rd edition.
@F 1--use punctuation
2--form complete sentences
3--don't ramble
4--stick to the subject matter
5--quit bitching and crying
6--don't drink and type.
@@22steve5150 Yeah but sometimes you just need enemies that are pure evil cannon fodder for the sake of guilt-free combat. For example the Grimm from RWBY are quite literally monsters with minimal autonomy and cognition aside from "kill humans" and that means The main characters can hack them to pieces in spectacular ways without worrying about the morality.
4:01 recently I've been playing final fantasy 14 and unlocked some cool activities know as Tribal quests in those quests you work alongside Beast tribes and you get closer and closer to them and I think that's something really interesting because those quests give the players a deeper dive into a culture that was otherwise just crazy enemies for you to punch, the people of those races that you actually have to kill have been tempered by powerful beings know as Primals, and according to the game, once you've been tempered by a Primal there's no turning back, it's honestly kinda heartbreaking, but it also makes the tribal quest feel really good because now you get to actually develop a relationship with the people.
In my own personal world, pretty much all of the common races have "Feral" varient. Hymans, orcs, goblinoids, gnomes, even halflings.
This sound like the kid played Undertale once and decided monsters should not be killed under any circumstances.
My God I hate the undertales game but yeah it feel like that
I have played Undertale and went pacifist because the monsters are like bears, they are more afraid of you then you are them, but in dnd and roleplays that have combat, it's kill or be killed and caution is held highly over anything else. So Ben flipping out over caution and leaving it tied up until they are certain it's safe instead of letting the monster go and attack the group and innocents is complete and udder bull crap.
Had an oath of redemption paladin in a game once who i bet played that game and thought things would play out the same, tried to talk down EVERYTHING! including gang thugs who had been running protection rackets, while tied up, with "c'mon, don't be evil, just like, get a job or something" and later trying to talk down a mind controlled fungus zombie, left after that last game, the thing is, if she made her intentions clearer in the beginning, i feel like we could have come to a better understanding on how NPC's would react and how sometimes you gotta have the upper hand to convince someone to "not be evil" lol
@@jasonrustmann7535 the thing is an the oath of redemption makes it clear that humanoids and things like your example of gang thugs arent inherently evil and are worth redemption, meaning she HAS to try to redeem them or risk losing her powers and/or becoming an oathbreaker(depending on how serious your dm takes keeping to your oath). however for things like fungus zombies yeah thats dumb, the oath even takes this into account saying things like undead, and fiends, and monsters are ok to kill.she definitely should have communicated that with the group though to avoid group conflicts
@@2g33ksgamingttv3 oh yeah, and i totally would have been down for her redeeming these thugs, but check this out, she goes around the city asking where their hideout is, finds it, then just goes and knocks on the door, and like a jehovah's witnesses, tries to get them to stop being thugs making tons of money shaking people down and get regular jobs, because it's bad, she didn't even want to wait for the rest of the party as back up or anything, just was gonna go do it lol she was almost like the Michael Jordan meme line for line, her whole pitch was pretty much "stop it, get some help", the rest of the party was pretty morally grey, lots of drinking, hustling, things of that sort, and had no patience to wait or talk with the other PCs before doing her own thing, the sad part is they would have helped with the fungus zombie thing, but she didn't want to wait for them, they were mostly casters and needed spell slots after burning them all on shenanigans
"You have no right to be upset with me." Excuse me? Who do you think you are? This is a dude who thinks he's so good at lying and manipulating people that he believes his own fallacies.
Not to burst your bubble but you low-key just got manipulated by OP.
Let's put it in perspective here. Kyle, am inexperienced player, made a dumbass decision. OPs husband who was DM should of noticed this and made appropriate responses that would of made the party aware.
OPs response is to make it an IRl drama, blow up, and humiliate Kyle Infront of their peers but simultaneously just totally forgive DM even though it only happened by his inept DMing. As a response she feels entitled to list why she is upset with him for something he did during a game but acts offended when he brings up being upset, no doubt about her emotional outburst that humiliates him.
...She is literally saying she is allowed to blow up at him irl for an in game decision and he isn't allowed to be upset by it, but he has to sit there and accept being lectured to about how he upset her?
If you've met or seen an emotionally abusive person you will recognize that OP is way, way closer to it than Kyle is. In fact Kyle, I would say from the info provided, is a victim of OP not getting her way and smearing him horridly for not giving her what she wanted, and it's worked on a lot of people here.
@@uh-ohspaghettio7826 I think there is no manipulators here. So say yes kyle is new and made a bad decision well that can be applied to everyone mainly the last one. The DM was overwhelmed OP was upset and kyle was having trouble with the rules and being creative. To me I see these types of stories as a tragic Dnd campaighn.
So ya see we all know we work together in dnd to create the story. Well this entire thing was new players stuck in a bunch of drama. It starts when Kyle makes a mistake maybe even just to be creative. They took it a little to far and OP gets upset. They want to be the bad person but calmly leaves and tries to make it better with the Adventurers Fund. They made another mistake. When that does not work out Kyle tries to text what the spell was to give context to the DM. The DM was overwhelmed and both the players who were overwhelming him and the DM who is too overwhelmed is making another mistake. Op tries to fix it again giving a passive aggressive text on why they were upset and Kyle makes a big mistake. Now we get to the part where Kyle understands this and says the whole it is just a game. Then with all the coincidences that had just occurred to him and by what you said made him humiliated. They start listing why they should be mad at OP. They start acting like a manipulator in a storm of revenge. After the mess that was that bit of drama all starting because one person made a big mistake and everyone else got stuck in it and made their own. Anyways, so now SIL and Kyle are engaged. After what just happened OP and DM want to warn her about what Kyle is not just what they act like when stuff like that happened. The SIL knows some of this as well as FIL. They saw the good side of Kyle a lot more than DM and OP did during that time and then it ends. This is coming from someone who lived something like this too and it divided the whole family.
DM and that guy: “we think ur being racist”
OP: “AGAINST A PEICE OF PAPER?!”
This actually reminds me of the time my character (an Owlin) was having an existential crisis about how a centaur and a bear (Long story) had a child it was a fuckin blacksmith that wanted to make me an armorer. My DM caught me talking about how the marriage shouldnt work and the entire room started talking about how this is just a panick couple and someone called be a rascist for interacial marriage. Thankfully we cleared it up and laugh at the memory
I feel like I'm one of the few that actually finds a race in dnd being constrained as being inherently evil as actually interesting, due to the questions that it opens on the concept of free will within a universe ruled by gods and the capacity of making the opponent more incomprehensible and therefore for difficult to role play with.
I like to imagine that in a world like that the God/Goddess at the top of the divinity totem pole is just a being that enjoys a good story and so makes a full-time antagonist race for other people to clash with.
I’m a DM and I’ve done quite a few campaigns in my time. I can’t count the amount of times somebody has called racism at my table for such ridiculous reasons. I need better friends
The funny thing is that 2 minutes later they are doing the exact same thing. When mention this you better be ready for an explosion.
“Can I interest you in racism?”
Honest to god spit my drink all over myself from the laugh and that was just the opening line 😂
Truthfully, the player concerned about the Yuan-ti is completely justified in his caution. It’s not JUST, that of the 20 he’s met, 20 have tried to kill him. Some of those 20 were captured, and restrained. and then attacked once they were freed.
So being a little worried, that the next one they’re going to free is going to attack them is a valid concern.
I try to view the DnD alignment system as such:
Good to Evil is essentially how many people your character would generally care about. If they're Good, they'll probably care about most if not all people they meet and want good things for them. If they're Neutral, they'll likely care about those around them, but less so the rest of the world. If they're Evil, they most likely only care about themselves, maybe their immediate friends or family.
Lawful, to me, means following a set of values or principles, always, because you believe them to be the best option. That doesn't mean you can't question them or, in rare circumstances, break them. Chaotic is the inverse, believing that no principles are perfect and the only thing you can really follow is your own sense of justice/morality and such. The Neutral here gets a bit more tricky, but I take it as someone who is essentially just trying to fulfil the other aspect of their alignment to the best of their ability. For example, a Neutral Good character is not concerned with principles, they're just trying their best to be Good above everything else, even if it's not to their own benefit. Whereas a Neutral Evil character is simply doing Evil for the sake of Evil, which here just means serving their own whims and wants, rest of the world be damned.
They're not perfect interpretations, but there is a lot of wiggle room within each of the 9 alignments, which is what I think makes for interesting characters.
For me a play a lawful neutral character *im extremely new to dnd please keep that in mind* and my character follows rules they were brough up with, for example. “Oh yea killings bad unless they hurt *character my character care about*”
I've been having this conversation for eons.
Lawful: Rules before individuals
Chaotic: Individuals before rules
Good: Puts others before themselves
Evil: Puts themselves before others
Neutral: Case by case basis
@@oathboundhero1782 this is a good explanation
Makes sense to me!
the Good/Evil alignment system for DnD is based off Christian values. By this set of standards it's fairly easy to know what falls under good and what falls under evil. It can become frustrating when players forget gods exist in DnD and are clear in their descriptions.
I once fell in the Abusive shoes of the relationship with my girlfriend, because being a 18 years old incel on the time we started dating, i really thought i had the right to tell her what she would do on every hour to make me not feel bad for myself
After an horroble fight and almost break-up, i understand the massive piece of shit i was, and how my abusive mother made me believe this was the right way to be in a relationship(Not surprised she's divorced now)
So i decided to move out and talk to my mother little as possible, got to therapy and pleaded to my gf to gave another chance to sort this out, and she did
This made my mother realise the piece of shit she was and try to be better too. Things are not the best, and we still can't really say we are better now, but still trying
At least we can say by now that we are at least not toxic to our partners by intention, but by somewhat habit, will be a long time before we fully get rid of this, and i pray my girlfriend can love enough to endure this
I wish you well
Let me tell you, you walked half the way by already admitting you have the problem... The other half is taking conscious of what you do now
God bless you, your mother and both your efforts in bearing your crosses. Through Mother Mary's Immaculate Heart in the Most Holy Name of Our Blessed Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Amen.
Sometimes I can see the opportunity for a great story plot in the madness. The crown story? If he just kept saying ‘I don’t know where it is’ over again over, and then that night the OP’s character wakes up to him trying to throttle them, still repeating the words ‘I don’t know where it is.’
The party manage to knock him out and find out that whoever had stolen the crown also cursed it as a last ‘fuck you!’
So they need to purge the curse before returning it, cue a horcrux type deal where they need to keep circulating the crown between them before they succumb.
I know I’m late, but I think I can give a simpler explanation on lawful alignments that doesn’t involve a society’s view
Lawful Good: They wish to be just and kind to those around them, and keep true to their promises that they give while helping those they can
Lawful Neutral: They do not question the system, they only do as is required of them
Lawful Evil: They want control or power in an orderly way with tactics or pulling strings to manipulate the outcome.
As for Chaotic alignments, they do not all believe themselves to be in the right, they just don’t care about the societal norms and laws or actively go against it
Chaotic Good: They deliberately go against the system so they can help those in needs, even if the means of doing so can be seen as wrong by certain parties
Chaotic Neutral: They do not care about anything and do not regard the consequences of their actions and how it may hurt things around them
Chaotic Evil: They are extremely selfish and destructive, sometimes even wishing nothing but chaos for those around them, and yes, they KNOW they’re doing evil
For your argument of a lawful good character in a corrupt society, that is called a moral dilemma for them. They are trained to follow the rules of the society they live in, but at the same time, they can’t stand seeing people living such miserable lives, so they must choose on wether they want to continue by the rules they’ve known all their lives, or break them to somehow better the lives of others. If anything, I think the concept of a Lawful Good character in a corrupt society really interesting rather than nonsense
The second story honestly speaks to me, as I recently got out of an extremely toxic friendship with someone I've known since 3rd grade (I'm 28 now to give you perspective). There were several times where I dropped them temporarily only to let them back into my life because they appeared to have changed, only for them to prove otherwise. He was also very suicidal and I'm very emotional so I didn't want to leave because I didn't want him to hurt himself or worse. Eventually he started a fight over some stupid misunderstanding and I finally said enough was enough and blocked him on every form of contact we had. That was really difficult and for a couple weeks after I was an emotional mess, but my life and mental state has improved dramatically since then.
I remember being in a similar situation in my life too. I knew this person since i was like 4 or so and we were friends for a good 10-15 years on and off, but they'd always make up lies and come up with insane bullshit to manipulate everyone around them. Every time it seemed they'd "changed" but in reality they just got a little better at lying. By the end of it i was really sick of it and ready to move on, but i kept being dragged back by their friends, family, etc.. even when i told them to just stop contacting me. The final straw was when one day the person literally broke into my house, fell asleep on my bed, and when confronted about it, threatened to kill me. That was the point i realized that people like them don't *ever* change, no matter what they say or do. I'm glad to be rid of them and am just waiting for the day they try to return to make good on their "threat"
@@beelzebub7221 if you haven't already you should contact local police to file a report so that if anything does happen they have a file and can pin them for it
“…he was going to take a break from D&D until I ‘figured myself out’.” People that like are always so shocked when what the other person figures out is that they need to leave them instead of scraping and bowing to them. I had someone I thought was my friend, but looking back, she was abusive at times. She finally accused me of stuff I never did and said our friendship was over. I guess she expected me to beg and plead and offer anything she wanted if she would just say we could still be friends, but instead I let it go and moved on with my life because why would you be friends with someone who attacks your character over false accusations that they made up so they could look like the victim.
That father-in-law sounds like a piece of work too. I can only imagine how he’s been treating his female relatives. I hope when the sister-in-law realizes how terrible her new husband is, she goes to OP and her brother/OP’s husband for help because it sounds like her father will give zero support. 😔
"Can I interest you in racism?" Brother I play warhammer
Well, I have a character who is a pirate (water dragon blood backstory, it's convoluted but works and makes interesting interactions) who is notoriously racist toward small folk because "they scare him," in fact, at one point, when I was a Ranger (before we had our characters reset for lore reasons), I was allowed to select Halflings and Gnomes as favored enemies without an alignment shift because, as the DM stated, I saw them as beasts, not as intelligent creatures (a morality flaw, yes). As the pirate, I even had a cannon that fired Halflings with explosives strapped to them. Excessive, yes, but hilarity ensued. Now, obviously wonton slaughter of a race doesn't go unnoticed so the goddess Yondalla approached me in a glamour as an Elf (by appearance, I looked half Elven, so this suited me) and seduced me. I had an idea of what was going on (OOC, it was obvious) and though I had an INT of 19, I rolled with it (as even deity avatars have overwhelming CHA). After a night with her, I was cursed (which I learned the hard way). Every small folk I killed gave me a permanent -1 to my CON. But every five I saved, I gain a permanent +1 to my DEX (which, purposely putting a Halfling/Gnome into a dangerous situation and "saving" them didn't count for the blessing as I discovered). Little by little, my character reformed and actually befriended small folk after coming to terms with their intelligence. Everyone had a good time and no one screamed racism (not unironically anyway, it was usually characters saying it to me while the player was trying to control their laughter because of something ludicrous I had just done). You gotta have the right group. Too many people let their feelings dictate FANTASY, something that's suppose to be a parody of real life and let everyone unwind and be creative. I have had sessions with temp players that got mad at me/my character, not because of flaws but because I will plan for everything. Like, he got mad and said the DM was helping me cheat because I was hiring blacksmiths to build weapons designs my character thought up or because I would spend a week training and get, say, a temporary buff to STR or something. So, there definitely is toxicity, but there is beauty too.