If he hated the OPs character that much he should have just vetoed the sheet instead of using in-game curses to morph it into something else. Why do DMs feel the need to do this? Just tell your players 'no' during session 0
you have to attune to items of all qualities above common, and you can only attune to a single item. the attunement is permanent, and you don't get to pick what item you attune to. instead, you roll a d100. If you roll 99 or lower, the attunement fails and the item destroys itself. it was also automatic, so merely TOUCHING an attunable item triggered the roll. furthermore, if you were already attuned to something and touched another item requiring attunement, the item was IMMEDIATELY DESTROYED. On top of this, if your attuned item was destroyed, you could never attune to another one, resulting in you being permanently unable to attune again. Now, take this rule, and apply it to a group where one player LOVES to cause chaos with every group. He attunes to an item he can't even use, and proceeds to destroy all of our attuned items in session zero. I didn't go back.
@@tehrulefoo we never found out the specific reason for this rule, but the DM did have a history with convincing other DMs to ban magic items many consider to be essential because they make the game "unbalanced and unfair to run". our speculation was that they wanted us to suffer.
Sounds like the DM that made the rule and the problem player are a pair of “Cumshots that should’ve been swallowed” and were probably doing that stupid shit for sick kicks. I hope they never played D&D again because no person would be stupid or desperate for D&D enough to put up with that bullshit that makes absolutely no sense.
First entry; I'm dubious of OP. Ruling a Cantrip can't move a boat doesn't seem like an egregious rule, vaguely mentions the other times they got shut down, and ends it with a sexism accusation...Reddit gonna Reddit though
Absolutely! Here's some math to tell OP that they're dumb. This uses the 2014 rules, by the way. Mage hand holds 10 pounds. 10lb. = 4.53 kg. The force necessary to hold 10 pounds is easy to calculate! Just multiply the weight by g, the constant for gravity on earth. g is 8.9. 4.53 x 9.8 = 44.39 N (Newtons) This is our force, f. Now then, lets see how fast she can push that "4000 lb boat." The formula for speed if you know the weight (mass) is a = F/m 4000 lb. = 1814.37 kg This is our mass, m. So, when we plug in those numbers, we get: a = 44.39 / 1814.37 a = 0.0245 m/s So, our acceleration is 0.02 m/s, or 0.055 mph. (0.088 Killometers / hour). Thats also 0.08 feet per second, and 0.48 feet per round. Sooo.... sure! You can push your boat with a mage hand! You will get across a 20 foot river in... 250 seconds! Thats 4 mins, 10 seconds. Hope you're not in a rush! Want to sail the seas? Sure! Lets sail 200 miles (a reasonable distance that could go higher very fast) That trip, pushed by your mage hand, takes 152 days. By the way! This doesn't account for anything like friction! (You're not going anywhere.)
@@sh4dowf0xx55 I was thinking of that too. Like...the thing with that "tap" is it has the force of a heavy human (at least 100bs) behind it. Mage hand is 10lbs.
Depends on how large the boat is and how rough the waters are. Should be able to push a raft through stagnant water with a mage hand. But for larger boats, or for resisting any wind or current, I would say five pounds isn't enough force.
You need 2 pounds to move a 100 pound boat. A 4000 pound boat would require 80 pounds so she could be right about being able to move it herself. This doesn't take mage hand rules in consideration and the sexism accusation is woman-tier incompetent rage because her other instances of "being creative" is extremely vague
Eye for Detail. An inquisitive rogue subclass ability that lets you spot hidden objects, secret doors, or creatures, and find and decipher clues after making an appropriate skill check. You would think this, combined with passive perception and investigation in the high twenties would it impossible to not notice anything out of the ordinary or realize something seems off. Apparently, a locked door enchanted with a power word kill glyph just looks like a normal door. That undead vampire hiding in a crate to ambush you? It’s not hiding, it’s obscured. You find an empty chest, but the next player to look at it immediately notices there is a false bottom. My character got permadeathed by a series of blunders, among other mitigating circumstances, that should not have happened because the DM insisted on being opaque about what my character notices and then handwaved that my character couldn’t use Eye for Detail or any other skill or ability by using adjectives synonymous to how the ability reads to justify why it didn’t “work.” Keep in mind that my character was built around noticing every small detail or clue that may be easily overlooked and had the feats, ability scores, and skills to back it up with to the extent that a mouse couldn’t so much as fart in a field without them knowing about it; and the DM not only knew that’s how I wanted to play the character, but encouraged it because they had little faith in the rest of party to anything productive outside of combat.
I had a DM in an AD&D second edition game gave out XP on a percentage basis. As a mage I could find trap but got less experience than the rogue that disarmed the trap. I would cast a spell doing the majority of damage but would get less XP than the fighter who hit creature for 1 damage and it died. I came up with the way to sneak into the an evil hideout and successfully got us in but everyone else got more XP from that’s week’s game. I asked him about the discrepancy and his answer was to run a game and I could handout the XP.
Had a DM who had something for Pathfinder that he calls "The Funky Rule". Basically, you can pick something that "breaks the rules" for your character. This could be a creature template (half-dragon, vampire, lycanthrope, etc), a special item that levels up with your character, straight 18s in your stats, _gestalting,_ or some unique ability that isn't normally available in the game. As long as the DM approves it, you can use it, and it's been a standard feature in any game that we've run since he introduced us to it. It's an absolute blast. ... Unless the DM for that game is the one who came up with the rule. See, he has a very unusual idea of how to approve things. Namely, that any race or class that isn't in the Core Rulebook takes up your Funky Rule. *Any* race or class. Apparently in his mind, these things all have the same level of power: A half-dragon Barbarian (half-dragon gives +8 Strength, 3 natural weapons, and wings) A gestalt Bard/Sorcerer (party buffs with bardoc performance on top of a mountain of spells feom the two classes, all of which run off of Charisma) A Monk with homebrewed DBZ-esque ki abilities (yes, we actually had someone do that) ...A _kobold_ Fighter (kobolds in Pathfinder have -4 Strength, -2 Constitution, and virtually no _beneficial_ abilities besides darkvision)... ...And a _human Cavalier_ (imagine a worse Fighter that only really gets one good attack per round, and that attack is reliant on them being able to charge in a straight line on horseback, so they're functionally worthless in dungeons). And of course, he would deny things for being "too powerful" when he had no idea what they even did (he veto'd my request to play a dhampir because "they get vampire powers, don't they?" Spoiler: no, they don't), or ignoring aspects of what we picked (a friend made a wyrwood rogue, basically a mini-warforged that has a lot of the construct immunities... and he said that they were still affected by things that their race profile explicitly says they're immune to; this one actually got my friend to leave that game).
cavaliers can actually be fantastic in dungeons. just play a small race and ride a war dog. the dogs can go into dungeons and you get all your damage off charge feats and rhino hide/mammoth hide armor anyway
That DM sounds like he has half of his brain missing, even a special needs child can think of better and fun rules that doesn’t sound like someone asking to get a hole punched through their face.
I always wish there was some way to hear the other side of these D&D horror stories. 'Cause there's always two sides to a story. Sometimes, one side is telling the whole truth, and the other side is lying. Sometimes both side are telling some pieces of the truth but embellishing the parts that make them look the best. It's always far too difficult to tell for sure what the case is without getting to hear other perspectives on the same story. Particularly without unbiased perspectives.
Not to hate on my DM, Love them to death. HOWEVER, I hate how they rules a few things. Darkvision: You only see shape outlines. It only says in the book how you cant see color. Holding Actions: You cant, move or use a bonus action. Where the hell it says I cant do that? Tabaxi Dash: RAW It doubles all your speed. According to them, its too strong, so you only get a movement bonus of your main walking speed. Hunters Mark: It took way to long to tell them how it works on each attack, not just the first one like Colossus slayer per turn. Sharpshooter: Pointless at this table... Ritual Casting: Still spends a spell slot They has some of the most memeable/ memorable characters that I have ever seen someone DM, But GOD DAMN do some of their rules infuriate me.
They're right about held actions, if I've understood what you're saying. The held action is just that, an action. Not a bonus or move action, an action. So you can move and do a bonus action on the turn you hold the action, but they are not part of the action when it goes off, so if didn't use them on your turn, you don't get them that round.
"Holding Actions: You cant, move or use a bonus action. Where the hell it says I cant do that?" Page 192-193 of the Player's Handbook. It details the standard Actions that players can take, including the Ready Action. You can use a Ready Action to essentially hold your Action until a pre-determined condition occurs, but you'll note that you're readying an Action, not a Bonus Action (which is a different thing) or your Movement. In theory, you can ready a Dash Action to move, but that's using your Action, not your Movement.
@@CorvusBelli01 I know, that. What I mean is, If I wanted to get into position as a Rogue, I could not move to a spot, bonus action hide, and hold my attack. If I want to hold an action. I have to sate that at the start of my turn and do nothing else. Effectively making me waste a turn doing nothing.
@@y2a1979 Not quite, How it worked for them. I have to state Im doing a held action. Then end my turn. I Can't move, or use a bonus action, or I loose my held action.
Played in a 3rd edition group where the dm's house rule was 'you only get experience by roleplaying', except he kept throwing our group into gauntlets and dungeons without peaceful npcs, after a few sessions I'd asked him what's up with his house rule and he simply said 'its supposed to encourage comradery'. One of those things I could see it working, but be was basing it on the characters' charisma instead of how we played into our stats, needless to say the bard was the only one getting significant exp. Same group and same edition but different dm, in a later campaign ruled that any conditions you had when you were absent carry over until you can play again, and just replaced absent players with cookiecutter npcs if anybody missed a session, another one of those things that could work within reason, but he didn't give a damn about continuity or balance regarding this arbitrary statis. In one instance the barbarian got stunned from some boss monster we had to leave on a cliffhanger, he missed thee next couple sessions, when he rejoined we were in a tavern celebrating and the DM said he was stuck in his room because he was stunned from the fight last time. But the worst occurrence was what happened to the rogue, we got into an egyptian themed dungeon and he got hit with mummy rot (recurring constitution damage or repeating max health reduction depending on edition) fairly early, while our wizard & paladin had some heals nobody had anything to deal with magical diseases, oh well we could just backtrack to town and get him cured right; wrong the guy went on vacation and missed the next handful of sessions while the dm never let us continue that option with some arbitrary excuse of 'your quest is on a time limit', so we proceeded and cleared out the dungeon before the rogue returned, only to have his character immediately die on the spot from going too long without being cured. Long story short, I stopped playing with a group of 3rd edition tryhards for enforcing biased rules that punished unfairly.
Sounds like those 3rd edition idiots are really asking for someone to replace their spine with the foot that would be going up their ass cause what the fuck kind of stupid rule is that? How about if someone gave that jerk a broken nose and put him in a coma, and then next thing you know he wakes up from his coma but “Uh oh, sorry you were “absent” from the last time you were conscious, we couldn’t treat your nose while you were away. We’re gonna have to remove your nose now.” Doesn’t sound fun does it? What a turd that DM is and any other DM that also uses that rule.
Remunds me of WAAAY back in the day when we were playing "The Dark Eye". Everyone in the group save for 1 person was new, including the DM (though he had played ADnD before). One of the first things he told us during character creation was that we weren't allowed to discuss party composition so everyone had to make their character independently from one another. ...What?
"guns kill. period." reminded me of an old Apple adventure game where your fantasy RPG character gets hit with a "reality shift" and winds up on the Death Star. all the Stormtroopers had only one hit point, did one point of damage, and were such lousy shots that some of them would "fumble" and SHOOT THEMSELVES! unfortunately, a later game by the same company i gave up on, because it was impossible. that one was called "assault on the Clonemaster". let me describe the scene: i got into a fight with some "generic guards". i killed one guard. two more joined the battle. i killed one guard. two more joined the battle. the Clonemaster himself joined the battle. i killed him. the Clonemaster himself joined the battle AGAIN. i quit the game.
I think the boat _she_ often moves is 4000 pounds while the boat in the game is a rowboat or something. Hard to tell with such a vague story but it would be possible in still water if the boat is small and not attached to anything. A large boat definitely won't move with "a light tap" unless you spend a lot of time accelerating it.
@backonlazer791 that's how I read it as well. They were saying "if I can move a 4k pound boat, a magehand can move a dinky little boat holding just us in the party."
Don't remember the full context, but someone chose either a subclass or a feat that would allow him to brew healing potions since magic healing was heavily nerfed. The DM said he could only brew one potion per day in spite of what RAW said, and did not allow him to change his character after the fact.
Regarding the drow with see-in-the-darkness goggles... If he's on that wyvern, how does the wyvern see where it's flying? If I were the DM, I'd have the drow player make Handle Animal checks (DC 18 because it's a very weird situation for the wyvern, but not necessarily uncommon if they live near drow settlements where darkness just happens sometimes) to keep their mount from panicking from sudden darkness engulfing them. Nat 20 - the drow gets their whole action to fight as normal. Beat DC 18 - The drow manages to control the mount, but has to choose between moving the mount or attacking. They can't do both. Fail DC by 10 or more - The drow must make a Dex Save (DC 15) or be unseated and on the cusp of falling - they lose their action and must make a Handle Animal (DC 12 using Strength instead of Wisdom) to get back in the saddle. Failing that roll doesn't cause them to fall, but both their hands become occupied with hanging on for dear life. They may try that last Handle Animal check with either Strength or Wisdom on the next turn to get back in the saddle as a movement action (equivalent of moving their speed). Nat 1 - The drow is unseated and begins to fall! Perhaps a successful Handle Animal (DC 20) can convince the wyvern to swoop down and catch him in its talons before impact? Point is, the drow could still try shooting from darkness, enemies will still have a hard time dealing with it, but there's also legitimate risk to the drow because his wyvern is literally flying blind and freaking out, and the fight becomes interesting again!
Similar, but not the same. There's just as many instances where a DM could use it to shut down 'that guy' as there are of some power-tripping madman desperately trying to show off his terrible homebrew. The phrase 'Its what my character would do' tends to only be used by trolls who are trying to justify screwing over their own party.
Lol, that DM obviously never even read the Wish spell... it would've been trivial to transport the player into the presence of the current wielder of the rapier, or the player gets it, but its previous owner is well aware of who has it and probably wants it back...
It's also capable of creating items worth up to 25,000 gp, so if it "failed" to acquire the artifact by creating a limited knockoff, it would be perfectly possible and logical for the knockoff to still be a +2 ghost touch rapier.
My charecter and my Best friends Charecter were ingame childhood sweethearts that were both crushing on eachother but for various reasons hadn't done anything about it until the chance of losing eachother became a real possibility. The third charecter (a monk) had a very gaurded attitude, wouldnt let people close due to her past, that was until she met our groups Wizard who took it upon herself to coax out the gentler side of the monk. (Yes, both relationships were hella gay) and we all got on like a house on fire, spent HOURS RPing stuff in text chat and after THREE MONTHS of weekly sessions, the DM decalared we had to end all romance or her was disbanding the campaign, he's ACTUAL words... 'you can just be friends' btw, The DM was PRESENT when myself and my friend discussed this at the very begining in session 0. we are all still playing in a campaign today... the DM is long gone. oh This same DM decided to change how devil sight works becasue he didn't like my charecter being able to see his 'special' hidden gloomstalker npc.
Yeah, I'm 50/50 on this. There's nothing informing about the time of day this was happening during, but if this was during the day? You're a flying ball of darkness, you're quite conspicuous so unless an enemy is already otherwise engaged, they're going to be wary of something leaving the sphere of darkness. Especially since it was centered on the bow specifically, meaning that the orb moved as they took aim. Honestly, reasonable for that kind of situation. If this was night, however, I'd say it's more likely for the trick to work and let advantage go through during that exact situation since they're less likely to be looking for an absence of stars to find you.
Wow these DMs are all putzes...not that I haven't ran into one before, but seriously. This is a checklist of what not to do. Also, NEVER, run the critical fumble or Injuries table. They only effect the players long term and punish players for even interacting with the world.
Oh i couldnt possibly balance for 1 d12 or 2d6 magic weapons . Oh hut im going to make you be a duel wielder . With multiple magic weaposn instead of just the one . Like , what ? Did he also ban fire ball ? Did he ban every spell if they did more then 2d6 or 1d12?
Not very major and only the one time, but I’m one combat the paladin got the Scared status and had to run away from the zombie horseman. Because he had to run past me, Phantom Rogue, just wanted to use opportunity attack Unarmed Strike flavored as a sweeping kick to trip him. While this might knock him prone, it would prevent him from booking on the fight. Despite rolling a 16 to hit, the DM said he wasn’t allowing that. I can’t imagine why as he almost allowed PvP the next session when the barbarian got pissed I scared away the Wyvern without having to fight it. I ended up talking the barbarian down from that.
More of a That Guy story, but once "played" in a guy's Exalted game. I say played in quotations because I personally didn't actually get to play. Exalted, for those who don't know, is a White Wolf game that out-epics the epic story of D&D. You play the reincarnation of people from a previous age, and you have powers that are so crazy that they literally had to put in a rule on what happens when the unstoppable force meets the immovable object. For first level equivalent abilities. Anyway, this guy added a familiar into the story from the first age. That familiar was a squirrel. You read that right. It was more powerful than any PC, hogged the spotlight, and if you said anything, the GM would explain how it runs up and one-shots you, knocking you to the ground, but not killing you because you wouldn't learn a lesson if you died. Me and my friend were in the game, and while he played, I spent the entire session making a character that would've been a normal character, but we knew more about the game than the GM. As soon as I finished making my character (30 minutes, lots of ability choices), the GM went "Okay, game's over." We asked why and he said the game store was closing. It wasn't, there were another 4-5 hours before the store closed. We pointed that out and he said he had to get ready for work. He didn't. He was a mailman and the next day was a Sunday. So basically, the guy lorded over on everyone, and when someone that could go toe-to-toe with him rules wise joined, he said "screw you guys, I'm going home."
I think the OP meant the DM was allowing the Devil's Sight enchantment on the goggles to also counteract the usual sunlight sensitivity the drow would have.
@Random_Tech-Priest the poster at the story right after my timestamp mentioned getting a item specifically to counter the sunlight sensitivity from devil sight...
9:30 actually im kinda on the dm with this one. You know where the attack will be coming from, and once it leaves the area you can see it. If it was at night id believe it, but in the broad daylight a giant black sphere lobbing projectiles is knowable. And keeping disadvantage is reasonable because they dont know where to attack within it.
Honestly, if I made a character that a DM didn't like, and just killed my PC, or tpk, I'd just reuse it in another campaign, leaving it exactly as was. Just as a middle finger lol.
5:40 that stuff actually makes sense. A wish spell is powerful, but a deity is even more so. I doubt a deity would just allow its artefact to be stolen so easily. And yes, it is theft, even if you worship the god in question. You must ask for approval beforehand.
I think it's still the DM who has us roll survival and performance for things based only on their names and not what those checks are actually for. Like he'll have you roll survival in place of CON saves to not die from lasers and have you roll performance to see how well you *perform* at lockpicking. 😅
Whoa crazy to hear a story from me on here lmfao. I am OP of the Devil's Sight goggles Gloomstalker story lmfao. Honestly don't remember ever posting it anywhere but I guess I did at some point haha.
Re: 30' darkness -- the advantage isn't so much about enemies not knowing where the attack is coming from, as it is about them not being able to see when it's coming.
I've said my piece on it in another comment, but I do think it bears repeating: that story lacks the crucial detail of Time of Day this combat is happening during. The reason I say this matters is twofold: Darkness was cast centered on THE PLAYER'S WEAPON; and that the player is actively RIDING A WYVERN (which is a flying mount). If this were at night, I'd say that the Advantage should still happen, as the absence of stars in part of the sky may go unnoticed. However, were this combat happening during the DAY, this player made themselves harder to attack, sure, but also far more conspicuous. At that point, I would say that any enemy not actively engaged with another target would be too aware of the player (or at least the risk of attacks from the Darkness) as to negate the advantage bonus altogether. This isn't to say it's not a good strategy and might keep both the wyvern and the rider safer by giving disadvantage to outside attacks coming at them, but it also becomes more conspicuous the more daylight is involved.
I hate critical fumble table. But lingering Injuries is a optional rule in the DMG and I think fair to use. I use it but I add a con save to resist the injury. So it's a "Softer" version of the Lingering Injury. But using the actual rules I think is okay.
"its because im a woman because he did this every time i tried doing something creative" I mean, "creative" is extremely vague and it seems a stretch to call these things sexism
It seems to me both plausible that there was some bias against her regarding that kind of thing, and also that there wasn’t and she was imagining it. I don’t think we can tell which it was from the little snippet. I don’t think we should dismiss the possibility that he was being sexist , nor conclude that he was.
(3.5) DM banned the Withdraw action, think Disengage, and doesn't let 5foot step avoid AOO. Got into an argument over it because I was trying to save my ranger companion from a minotaur skeleton
Every time I hear about some shit of “3.5 is better than 5e you should try it” and I hear this shit and on top of the mind numbing number crunching and the circus act of balancing classes together that you instead could just DO in 5e or straight up homebrew, makes me NEVER want to play 3.5 especially if die hard fans of it act like this all the time. What a bother these DM’s are.
Rogues are all about fighting in underhandedly, that is the whole point of the class! As a DM, if your characters will be fighting for an honorable and righteous side, tell them that they shouldn't play a rogue, or any other character with morally questionable ways of fighting.
Exactly I'm playing a Chaotic Good female Dhampir Assassin Rouge in a 5E homebrew horror/dark fantasy campaign and well I take any chance I get to have her fight dirty take advantage of Spider-Climb and drop down with rapier or both daggers in hand or use the shortbow for a hidden ranged attack that is out of sight due to being in stealth for a sneak attack yes please take advantage of the combo of sneak attack and the Assassinate Feature for massive damage yes I will take that option use her poisoner's kit to craft a neurotoxin that does necrotic damage to a target and coat either one of her daggers, her rapier, or an arrow in it and use it to ensure that enemy dies and suffers in agony while slowly dying hell yes! Heck I have as part of her personality and bio that she is fine with being seen by the corrupt as a "wicked, dishonorable, bloodsucking seemingly undead monster" and will go to any length and use any tactic honorable or dishonorable including drinking her opponent's blood and using her feminine wiles to ensure the wicked pay for their crimes.
lvl 5 group finds medusa, so i wild shape into a spider with my eyes closed because blindsight, charge the medusa and my dm turns me to stone... before i get into blindsight range... my character gets one-shot and my dm rules the damage focus cleric can heal me if they have heal spells. lucky for me, they supprise my dm because they took one just in case.
2:00 any self-respecting knight exemplar would go out of their way to decurse-ify themselves before this foul relic of darkness gains power over their immortal soul. Furthermore it is the peak of virtue to resist it and continue to act as oneself would despite its vile and putrid influence. SEE HOW FORCING THE ROGUE TO BE A PALADIN DOESN'T WORK DM
My dm thinks that spellcasters have to many options so is banning absolutely all non phb spells isnt even a thing like banning silvery barbs is just a straight ban to everything outside it In the other hand all the other players have subclasses from tashas and we even have an artificer And the worst part is that he absolutely didn't said that before the last session because apparently i have to assume that everyone else having Tasha's content wasn't allowing the spells(That aren't even that good)
A boat will not move with a finger tap, that's why you have to row or use an engine. If a boat could be moved so easily then why did the Titanic get ruined by an iceberg? The weight of the boat matters 🤷♂️ that being said, it seems like a dm could roll with fun ideas like cleverly using skills ✌️
I really hate when DM's try to take over a character like they did in the second story. Its just terrible DMing. The only time I ever did something close to that was with a problematic player, this wasn't DnD and my first time running a game. I talked with him 4 times about how he was doing way too much damage and he needed to make some kind of change because I had a very difficult time trying to balance fights, what would have been a challenge for him the other PCs wouldn't be able to do anything to. He kept one-shoting things and I needed him to tone it down. I actually had this problem with another player but after talking to him once he changed up his tactics and had so much more fun setting up other players, I was hoping for something similar but no. I had him lose both his weapons and given him something that would have limited his damage. That did help but it felt really bad to railroad the player like that, that is something I'd never do again unless I had to.
Maybe its me but i would never dream of telling to dial something their doing back like in one of the last stories. Like i get not everyone get the fail tables can suck and not everyone likes them but they exist for a reason and if a dm wants to use in their game thats their choice
@@BurroughsProductions The premise of the video (as indicated by the title of the video) is DMs ‘saying’ “my game my rules” in a bad way. This assumes that it is possible to run things in a way that is worthy of criticism. Doesn’t this imply that some amount of feedback can be appropriate?
Had a DM, that said choice had consequence, my character had become a leader of a region. Prior to that there were certain individuals who had acquired specific powers that had died. There were only three people who had the power living, one was not a true user, the other was my character's best friend. But one of the first orders he tried to order was to secure the remains that had these powers within their bodies to keep them from being used. The DM ignored that as it became the basis of the next arc. The following arc, my character was taken to a holy plane. But he was cast out by omniscient beings and the arc was going to be forced to end. He had learned the realm allowed things to be manipulated, by perception and will. So he thought that if the gods of the realm could be convinced to believe something could they collectively made to believe something could they will it to be. I argued with the DM that because they ignored my command which would have negated the previous arc, that choice and consequence was negated that this arc shouldn't be made null and void and we could work out an alternative. They called me a whiner because I kept pointing out how choice/consequence only ever seemed to be in my negative never positive when listed a little dozen points. She then nuked the discord server we were playing on and blocked me on everything rather than having a conversation.
Playing a gnoll cleric who was raised by humans-in society-so she never took on any of the socialized traits of standard gnolls. She's married, and absolutely devoted to her wife, who's waiting at home for her to finish her holy duties and come back to her. Is so devoted and enamored she'll talk your ear off at the slightest opportunity, about how great her wife is; but not to the point she annoys people with it when it wouldn't be appropriate. Rest of the party actually finds it adorable, and encourages her. Cut to about session five or so. Party's making our way through an allegedly-abandoned old fort, investigating rumors of recent disappearances. Accompanied by a handful of NPC's of varying professions. Keep encountering random wild animals, but no real threats. At one point, we make camp within the moldering fort, and are merrily socializing around the campfire as we make something for dinner. Archeologist NPC approaches our gnoll gal and tries to hit on her. I have the cleric tell him she's very flattered, but she happens to be married...and a lesbian. To my utter bemusement (no, that's *not* a synonym for amusement), the DM proceeds to roll a d20. And gets a nat 20. Proceeds to inform me that the NPC has successfully wooed my cleric, and will be making hanky panky. I protest that 1, the DMG makes it pretty blatantly clear that "when a character is attempting to persuade a PC, dice should *never, ever* be rolled; the player being persuaded needs to be...well...persuaded!" is the *one rule* in the entire book, that is *not* a suggestion or guideline...2, even if I'd agreed to allow a dice roll, nat 20 on anything other than an attack roll is not a guaranteed success, just the character doing the absolutely, positively best they possibly could...3, the gnoll is very VERY much devoted, loyal, and not into guys. He *actually says* "my game, my rules." Word for word. Packed my crap and left. Found out later he tried to have an NPC version of my gnoll get freaky with the archeologist, anyway, but the other players all shut that down right away. Joke's on him, too, because my gnoll was the only healer in the party, and the players blamed HIM for the lack, and his campaign fell apart entirely, soon after.
I… I don’t see how you being in darkness would give you advantage if they know the darkness hides an archer. Like, the rule about darkness is because they can’t see the arrow coming, but if you’re firing out of the darkness they can still see the arrow. It’s not a bullet, it doesn’t move so fast you can’t react. If they were in darkness then yeah, perfect set up, but like they described i would side with the DM
Our dm is great overall but i wish a nat20 would always be a nat 20 even if there is nothing to investigate at least let us discover some mundane extra detail with zero effect but for RP immersion
A "nat 20" is only relevant in combat, where a 20 is always a succesful attack, regardless of the enemies AC, and does additional damage. In all other circumstances, such as investigation checks, it merely represents "the best possible outcome you can achieve". If there's nothing to find, the best possible outcome is still "there's nothing to find." It's also only the best YOU can achieve; if something has a DC of 25, and you've got a +3 bonus to the check, you quite simply cannot succeed.
Yeah...that DM that slowly literally rewrote the entire character was BAD.
If he hated the OPs character that much he should have just vetoed the sheet instead of using in-game curses to morph it into something else. Why do DMs feel the need to do this? Just tell your players 'no' during session 0
@@tehrulefoo Exactly.
you have to attune to items of all qualities above common, and you can only attune to a single item. the attunement is permanent, and you don't get to pick what item you attune to. instead, you roll a d100. If you roll 99 or lower, the attunement fails and the item destroys itself. it was also automatic, so merely TOUCHING an attunable item triggered the roll. furthermore, if you were already attuned to something and touched another item requiring attunement, the item was IMMEDIATELY DESTROYED. On top of this, if your attuned item was destroyed, you could never attune to another one, resulting in you being permanently unable to attune again. Now, take this rule, and apply it to a group where one player LOVES to cause chaos with every group. He attunes to an item he can't even use, and proceeds to destroy all of our attuned items in session zero. I didn't go back.
Holy fkng hell.
Good god, hope the DM learned his lesson lol
Bruh. Why even have magic items in your game if there's only a 1% chance your players will get to use them?
@@tehrulefoo we never found out the specific reason for this rule, but the DM did have a history with convincing other DMs to ban magic items many consider to be essential because they make the game "unbalanced and unfair to run". our speculation was that they wanted us to suffer.
Sounds like the DM that made the rule and the problem player are a pair of “Cumshots that should’ve been swallowed” and were probably doing that stupid shit for sick kicks. I hope they never played D&D again because no person would be stupid or desperate for D&D enough to put up with that bullshit that makes absolutely no sense.
First entry; I'm dubious of OP.
Ruling a Cantrip can't move a boat doesn't seem like an egregious rule, vaguely mentions the other times they got shut down, and ends it with a sexism accusation...Reddit gonna Reddit though
She is not used to being told no it seems. Very entitled.
Absolutely! Here's some math to tell OP that they're dumb.
This uses the 2014 rules, by the way.
Mage hand holds 10 pounds.
10lb. = 4.53 kg.
The force necessary to hold 10 pounds is easy to calculate! Just multiply the weight by g, the constant for gravity on earth. g is 8.9.
4.53 x 9.8 = 44.39 N (Newtons) This is our force, f.
Now then, lets see how fast she can push that "4000 lb boat." The formula for speed if you know the weight (mass) is a = F/m
4000 lb. = 1814.37 kg This is our mass, m.
So, when we plug in those numbers, we get:
a = 44.39 / 1814.37
a = 0.0245 m/s
So, our acceleration is 0.02 m/s, or 0.055 mph. (0.088 Killometers / hour). Thats also 0.08 feet per second, and 0.48 feet per round.
Sooo.... sure! You can push your boat with a mage hand! You will get across a 20 foot river in... 250 seconds! Thats 4 mins, 10 seconds. Hope you're not in a rush!
Want to sail the seas? Sure! Lets sail 200 miles (a reasonable distance that could go higher very fast)
That trip, pushed by your mage hand, takes 152 days.
By the way! This doesn't account for anything like friction! (You're not going anywhere.)
@@sh4dowf0xx55 I was thinking of that too. Like...the thing with that "tap" is it has the force of a heavy human (at least 100bs) behind it. Mage hand is 10lbs.
Depends on how large the boat is and how rough the waters are. Should be able to push a raft through stagnant water with a mage hand. But for larger boats, or for resisting any wind or current, I would say five pounds isn't enough force.
You need 2 pounds to move a 100 pound boat. A 4000 pound boat would require 80 pounds so she could be right about being able to move it herself. This doesn't take mage hand rules in consideration and the sexism accusation is woman-tier incompetent rage because her other instances of "being creative" is extremely vague
Hypnotic pattern affecting characters that enter the area in rounds after it was cast.
Eye for Detail. An inquisitive rogue subclass ability that lets you spot hidden objects, secret doors, or creatures, and find and decipher clues after making an appropriate skill check. You would think this, combined with passive perception and investigation in the high twenties would it impossible to not notice anything out of the ordinary or realize something seems off. Apparently, a locked door enchanted with a power word kill glyph just looks like a normal door. That undead vampire hiding in a crate to ambush you? It’s not hiding, it’s obscured. You find an empty chest, but the next player to look at it immediately notices there is a false bottom. My character got permadeathed by a series of blunders, among other mitigating circumstances, that should not have happened because the DM insisted on being opaque about what my character notices and then handwaved that my character couldn’t use Eye for Detail or any other skill or ability by using adjectives synonymous to how the ability reads to justify why it didn’t “work.” Keep in mind that my character was built around noticing every small detail or clue that may be easily overlooked and had the feats, ability scores, and skills to back it up with to the extent that a mouse couldn’t so much as fart in a field without them knowing about it; and the DM not only knew that’s how I wanted to play the character, but encouraged it because they had little faith in the rest of party to anything productive outside of combat.
I had a DM in an AD&D second edition game gave out XP on a percentage basis. As a mage I could find trap but got less experience than the rogue that disarmed the trap. I would cast a spell doing the majority of damage but would get less XP than the fighter who hit creature for 1 damage and it died. I came up with the way to sneak into the an evil hideout and successfully got us in but everyone else got more XP from that’s week’s game. I asked him about the discrepancy and his answer was to run a game and I could handout the XP.
Way past time to find a new DM...
Had a DM who had something for Pathfinder that he calls "The Funky Rule". Basically, you can pick something that "breaks the rules" for your character. This could be a creature template (half-dragon, vampire, lycanthrope, etc), a special item that levels up with your character, straight 18s in your stats, _gestalting,_ or some unique ability that isn't normally available in the game. As long as the DM approves it, you can use it, and it's been a standard feature in any game that we've run since he introduced us to it. It's an absolute blast.
... Unless the DM for that game is the one who came up with the rule. See, he has a very unusual idea of how to approve things. Namely, that any race or class that isn't in the Core Rulebook takes up your Funky Rule. *Any* race or class.
Apparently in his mind, these things all have the same level of power:
A half-dragon Barbarian (half-dragon gives +8 Strength, 3 natural weapons, and wings)
A gestalt Bard/Sorcerer (party buffs with bardoc performance on top of a mountain of spells feom the two classes, all of which run off of Charisma)
A Monk with homebrewed DBZ-esque ki abilities (yes, we actually had someone do that)
...A _kobold_ Fighter (kobolds in Pathfinder have -4 Strength, -2 Constitution, and virtually no _beneficial_ abilities besides darkvision)...
...And a _human Cavalier_ (imagine a worse Fighter that only really gets one good attack per round, and that attack is reliant on them being able to charge in a straight line on horseback, so they're functionally worthless in dungeons).
And of course, he would deny things for being "too powerful" when he had no idea what they even did (he veto'd my request to play a dhampir because "they get vampire powers, don't they?" Spoiler: no, they don't), or ignoring aspects of what we picked (a friend made a wyrwood rogue, basically a mini-warforged that has a lot of the construct immunities... and he said that they were still affected by things that their race profile explicitly says they're immune to; this one actually got my friend to leave that game).
cavaliers can actually be fantastic in dungeons. just play a small race and ride a war dog. the dogs can go into dungeons and you get all your damage off charge feats and rhino hide/mammoth hide armor anyway
That DM sounds like he has half of his brain missing, even a special needs child can think of better and fun rules that doesn’t sound like someone asking to get a hole punched through their face.
Honestly if it's good enough for the players to have, why shouldn't the DM have it too?
7:09 "You have incredible patience. I wouldn't have waited the few weeks." Psht, you have more than I do! I wouldn't have gone back for session 3...
I always wish there was some way to hear the other side of these D&D horror stories. 'Cause there's always two sides to a story. Sometimes, one side is telling the whole truth, and the other side is lying. Sometimes both side are telling some pieces of the truth but embellishing the parts that make them look the best. It's always far too difficult to tell for sure what the case is without getting to hear other perspectives on the same story. Particularly without unbiased perspectives.
Not to hate on my DM, Love them to death. HOWEVER, I hate how they rules a few things.
Darkvision: You only see shape outlines. It only says in the book how you cant see color.
Holding Actions: You cant, move or use a bonus action. Where the hell it says I cant do that?
Tabaxi Dash: RAW It doubles all your speed. According to them, its too strong, so you only get a movement bonus of your main walking speed.
Hunters Mark: It took way to long to tell them how it works on each attack, not just the first one like Colossus slayer per turn.
Sharpshooter: Pointless at this table...
Ritual Casting: Still spends a spell slot
They has some of the most memeable/ memorable characters that I have ever seen someone DM, But GOD DAMN do some of their rules infuriate me.
They're right about held actions, if I've understood what you're saying. The held action is just that, an action. Not a bonus or move action, an action. So you can move and do a bonus action on the turn you hold the action, but they are not part of the action when it goes off, so if didn't use them on your turn, you don't get them that round.
"Holding Actions: You cant, move or use a bonus action. Where the hell it says I cant do that?"
Page 192-193 of the Player's Handbook.
It details the standard Actions that players can take, including the Ready Action. You can use a Ready Action to essentially hold your Action until a pre-determined condition occurs, but you'll note that you're readying an Action, not a Bonus Action (which is a different thing) or your Movement. In theory, you can ready a Dash Action to move, but that's using your Action, not your Movement.
@@CorvusBelli01 I know, that. What I mean is, If I wanted to get into position as a Rogue, I could not move to a spot, bonus action hide, and hold my attack. If I want to hold an action. I have to sate that at the start of my turn and do nothing else. Effectively making me waste a turn doing nothing.
@@y2a1979 Not quite, How it worked for them. I have to state Im doing a held action. Then end my turn. I Can't move, or use a bonus action, or I loose my held action.
@@Floraclaw Oh, then yes, they were wrong. lol
Played in a 3rd edition group where the dm's house rule was 'you only get experience by roleplaying', except he kept throwing our group into gauntlets and dungeons without peaceful npcs, after a few sessions I'd asked him what's up with his house rule and he simply said 'its supposed to encourage comradery'. One of those things I could see it working, but be was basing it on the characters' charisma instead of how we played into our stats, needless to say the bard was the only one getting significant exp.
Same group and same edition but different dm, in a later campaign ruled that any conditions you had when you were absent carry over until you can play again, and just replaced absent players with cookiecutter npcs if anybody missed a session, another one of those things that could work within reason, but he didn't give a damn about continuity or balance regarding this arbitrary statis. In one instance the barbarian got stunned from some boss monster we had to leave on a cliffhanger, he missed thee next couple sessions, when he rejoined we were in a tavern celebrating and the DM said he was stuck in his room because he was stunned from the fight last time. But the worst occurrence was what happened to the rogue, we got into an egyptian themed dungeon and he got hit with mummy rot (recurring constitution damage or repeating max health reduction depending on edition) fairly early, while our wizard & paladin had some heals nobody had anything to deal with magical diseases, oh well we could just backtrack to town and get him cured right; wrong the guy went on vacation and missed the next handful of sessions while the dm never let us continue that option with some arbitrary excuse of 'your quest is on a time limit', so we proceeded and cleared out the dungeon before the rogue returned, only to have his character immediately die on the spot from going too long without being cured.
Long story short, I stopped playing with a group of 3rd edition tryhards for enforcing biased rules that punished unfairly.
Sounds like those 3rd edition idiots are really asking for someone to replace their spine with the foot that would be going up their ass cause what the fuck kind of stupid rule is that? How about if someone gave that jerk a broken nose and put him in a coma, and then next thing you know he wakes up from his coma but “Uh oh, sorry you were “absent” from the last time you were conscious, we couldn’t treat your nose while you were away. We’re gonna have to remove your nose now.” Doesn’t sound fun does it? What a turd that DM is and any other DM that also uses that rule.
Remunds me of WAAAY back in the day when we were playing "The Dark Eye". Everyone in the group save for 1 person was new, including the DM (though he had played ADnD before). One of the first things he told us during character creation was that we weren't allowed to discuss party composition so everyone had to make their character independently from one another. ...What?
"guns kill. period." reminded me of an old Apple adventure game where your fantasy RPG character gets hit with a "reality shift" and winds up on the Death Star.
all the Stormtroopers had only one hit point, did one point of damage, and were such lousy shots that some of them would "fumble" and SHOOT THEMSELVES!
unfortunately, a later game by the same company i gave up on, because it was impossible.
that one was called "assault on the Clonemaster".
let me describe the scene:
i got into a fight with some "generic guards".
i killed one guard.
two more joined the battle.
i killed one guard.
two more joined the battle.
the Clonemaster himself joined the battle.
i killed him.
the Clonemaster himself joined the battle AGAIN.
i quit the game.
Fifth rule of DMing: DO NOT put a calamity in front of your players if you do not want them to do anything to stop it!
DM in story 1 was right though lol. Boats do move easier in water, but a 10 pound mage hand vs a 4000 pound boat, even in water, isn't doing squat.
I think the boat _she_ often moves is 4000 pounds while the boat in the game is a rowboat or something. Hard to tell with such a vague story but it would be possible in still water if the boat is small and not attached to anything. A large boat definitely won't move with "a light tap" unless you spend a lot of time accelerating it.
@backonlazer791 that's how I read it as well. They were saying "if I can move a 4k pound boat, a magehand can move a dinky little boat holding just us in the party."
I mean technically that's an occupied object, mage hand can only affect unoccupied objects
Don't remember the full context, but someone chose either a subclass or a feat that would allow him to brew healing potions since magic healing was heavily nerfed. The DM said he could only brew one potion per day in spite of what RAW said, and did not allow him to change his character after the fact.
5:24 I want to get off of Mr Bones Wild Ride.
Regarding the drow with see-in-the-darkness goggles... If he's on that wyvern, how does the wyvern see where it's flying?
If I were the DM, I'd have the drow player make Handle Animal checks (DC 18 because it's a very weird situation for the wyvern, but not necessarily uncommon if they live near drow settlements where darkness just happens sometimes) to keep their mount from panicking from sudden darkness engulfing them.
Nat 20 - the drow gets their whole action to fight as normal.
Beat DC 18 - The drow manages to control the mount, but has to choose between moving the mount or attacking. They can't do both.
Fail DC by 10 or more - The drow must make a Dex Save (DC 15) or be unseated and on the cusp of falling - they lose their action and must make a Handle Animal (DC 12 using Strength instead of Wisdom) to get back in the saddle. Failing that roll doesn't cause them to fall, but both their hands become occupied with hanging on for dear life. They may try that last Handle Animal check with either Strength or Wisdom on the next turn to get back in the saddle as a movement action (equivalent of moving their speed).
Nat 1 - The drow is unseated and begins to fall! Perhaps a successful Handle Animal (DC 20) can convince the wyvern to swoop down and catch him in its talons before impact?
Point is, the drow could still try shooting from darkness, enemies will still have a hard time dealing with it, but there's also legitimate risk to the drow because his wyvern is literally flying blind and freaking out, and the fight becomes interesting again!
is the "my game my rules" the DM version of the "thats what my character would do"
Similar, but not the same. There's just as many instances where a DM could use it to shut down 'that guy' as there are of some power-tripping madman desperately trying to show off his terrible homebrew. The phrase 'Its what my character would do' tends to only be used by trolls who are trying to justify screwing over their own party.
Sword/ wraith story: I wouldn't have made a new character. I would've elbow dropped the DM
Lol, that DM obviously never even read the Wish spell... it would've been trivial to transport the player into the presence of the current wielder of the rapier, or the player gets it, but its previous owner is well aware of who has it and probably wants it back...
It's also capable of creating items worth up to 25,000 gp, so if it "failed" to acquire the artifact by creating a limited knockoff, it would be perfectly possible and logical for the knockoff to still be a +2 ghost touch rapier.
My charecter and my Best friends Charecter were ingame childhood sweethearts that were both crushing on eachother but for various reasons hadn't done anything about it until the chance of losing eachother became a real possibility.
The third charecter (a monk) had a very gaurded attitude, wouldnt let people close due to her past, that was until she met our groups Wizard who took it upon herself to coax out the gentler side of the monk.
(Yes, both relationships were hella gay) and we all got on like a house on fire, spent HOURS RPing stuff in text chat and after THREE MONTHS of weekly sessions, the DM decalared we had to end all romance or her was disbanding the campaign, he's ACTUAL words...
'you can just be friends'
btw, The DM was PRESENT when myself and my friend discussed this at the very begining in session 0.
we are all still playing in a campaign today... the DM is long gone.
oh
This same DM decided to change how devil sight works becasue he didn't like my charecter being able to see his 'special' hidden gloomstalker npc.
The "you are shooting from the center of a ball of darkness, they can see that" ruling makes a lot of sense to me
Yeah, I'm 50/50 on this. There's nothing informing about the time of day this was happening during, but if this was during the day? You're a flying ball of darkness, you're quite conspicuous so unless an enemy is already otherwise engaged, they're going to be wary of something leaving the sphere of darkness. Especially since it was centered on the bow specifically, meaning that the orb moved as they took aim. Honestly, reasonable for that kind of situation. If this was night, however, I'd say it's more likely for the trick to work and let advantage go through during that exact situation since they're less likely to be looking for an absence of stars to find you.
@rayhatesu agreed 100%
If the ball like, lagged behind a bit as the bow moved, then I think it would disguise the position, but I don’t suppose that’s how the spell works?
Wow these DMs are all putzes...not that I haven't ran into one before, but seriously. This is a checklist of what not to do.
Also, NEVER, run the critical fumble or Injuries table. They only effect the players long term and punish players for even interacting with the world.
Why do all of these people wait so long to leave or say something? Speaking up cuts this nonsense short.
Oh i couldnt possibly balance for 1 d12 or 2d6 magic weapons . Oh hut im going to make you be a duel wielder . With multiple magic weaposn instead of just the one . Like , what ? Did he also ban fire ball ? Did he ban every spell if they did more then 2d6 or 1d12?
Not very major and only the one time, but I’m one combat the paladin got the Scared status and had to run away from the zombie horseman. Because he had to run past me, Phantom Rogue, just wanted to use opportunity attack Unarmed Strike flavored as a sweeping kick to trip him. While this might knock him prone, it would prevent him from booking on the fight. Despite rolling a 16 to hit, the DM said he wasn’t allowing that. I can’t imagine why as he almost allowed PvP the next session when the barbarian got pissed I scared away the Wyvern without having to fight it. I ended up talking the barbarian down from that.
More of a That Guy story, but once "played" in a guy's Exalted game. I say played in quotations because I personally didn't actually get to play. Exalted, for those who don't know, is a White Wolf game that out-epics the epic story of D&D. You play the reincarnation of people from a previous age, and you have powers that are so crazy that they literally had to put in a rule on what happens when the unstoppable force meets the immovable object. For first level equivalent abilities.
Anyway, this guy added a familiar into the story from the first age. That familiar was a squirrel. You read that right. It was more powerful than any PC, hogged the spotlight, and if you said anything, the GM would explain how it runs up and one-shots you, knocking you to the ground, but not killing you because you wouldn't learn a lesson if you died. Me and my friend were in the game, and while he played, I spent the entire session making a character that would've been a normal character, but we knew more about the game than the GM. As soon as I finished making my character (30 minutes, lots of ability choices), the GM went "Okay, game's over." We asked why and he said the game store was closing. It wasn't, there were another 4-5 hours before the store closed. We pointed that out and he said he had to get ready for work. He didn't. He was a mailman and the next day was a Sunday.
So basically, the guy lorded over on everyone, and when someone that could go toe-to-toe with him rules wise joined, he said "screw you guys, I'm going home."
The squirrel being a high god of humility who wanted to teach it to Solars would be entertaining, but hogging the spotlight would be a bit much.
2:14 If the enemy is willing to go low and place traps, it is only fair that you look for them.
Mage Hand can't move more than 10lbs no matter what surface it's on. But go ahead claiming it's because sexism. 😂
These DMs' sentence: Teleported to Notsea Germany
This would be annoying but kinda a fun idea 2:14
uhh 8:09, devil sight doesn't have sunlight sensitivity... neither does the gloomstalker's ability
I think the OP meant the DM was allowing the Devil's Sight enchantment on the goggles to also counteract the usual sunlight sensitivity the drow would have.
No one said that it did
@Random_Tech-Priest the poster at the story right after my timestamp mentioned getting a item specifically to counter the sunlight sensitivity from devil sight...
@@rhondeau9175 they said to alleviate sunlight sensitivity WITH devil sight not that they have sunlight sensitivity from devil sight
@Random_Tech-Priest they were referencing an item though. And devil sight does nothing to alleviate sunlight sensitivity either
9:30 actually im kinda on the dm with this one. You know where the attack will be coming from, and once it leaves the area you can see it. If it was at night id believe it, but in the broad daylight a giant black sphere lobbing projectiles is knowable. And keeping disadvantage is reasonable because they dont know where to attack within it.
Honestly, if I made a character that a DM didn't like, and just killed my PC, or tpk, I'd just reuse it in another campaign, leaving it exactly as was. Just as a middle finger lol.
5:40 that stuff actually makes sense.
A wish spell is powerful, but a deity is even more so. I doubt a deity would just allow its artefact to be stolen so easily. And yes, it is theft, even if you worship the god in question. You must ask for approval beforehand.
I think it's still the DM who has us roll survival and performance for things based only on their names and not what those checks are actually for. Like he'll have you roll survival in place of CON saves to not die from lasers and have you roll performance to see how well you *perform* at lockpicking. 😅
Whoa crazy to hear a story from me on here lmfao. I am OP of the Devil's Sight goggles Gloomstalker story lmfao. Honestly don't remember ever posting it anywhere but I guess I did at some point haha.
Re: 30' darkness -- the advantage isn't so much about enemies not knowing where the attack is coming from, as it is about them not being able to see when it's coming.
I've said my piece on it in another comment, but I do think it bears repeating: that story lacks the crucial detail of Time of Day this combat is happening during. The reason I say this matters is twofold: Darkness was cast centered on THE PLAYER'S WEAPON; and that the player is actively RIDING A WYVERN (which is a flying mount). If this were at night, I'd say that the Advantage should still happen, as the absence of stars in part of the sky may go unnoticed. However, were this combat happening during the DAY, this player made themselves harder to attack, sure, but also far more conspicuous. At that point, I would say that any enemy not actively engaged with another target would be too aware of the player (or at least the risk of attacks from the Darkness) as to negate the advantage bonus altogether. This isn't to say it's not a good strategy and might keep both the wyvern and the rider safer by giving disadvantage to outside attacks coming at them, but it also becomes more conspicuous the more daylight is involved.
I was only allowed to play a small handful of classes. DM never said why but nobody else was limited like this.
I hate critical fumble table.
But lingering Injuries is a optional rule in the DMG and I think fair to use.
I use it but I add a con save to resist the injury. So it's a "Softer" version of the Lingering Injury. But using the actual rules I think is okay.
"its because im a woman because he did this every time i tried doing something creative"
I mean, "creative" is extremely vague and it seems a stretch to call these things sexism
It seems to me both plausible that there was some bias against her regarding that kind of thing, and also that there wasn’t and she was imagining it. I don’t think we can tell which it was from the little snippet.
I don’t think we should dismiss the possibility that he was being sexist , nor conclude that he was.
(3.5) DM banned the Withdraw action, think Disengage, and doesn't let 5foot step avoid AOO. Got into an argument over it because I was trying to save my ranger companion from a minotaur skeleton
Every time I hear about some shit of “3.5 is better than 5e you should try it” and I hear this shit and on top of the mind numbing number crunching and the circus act of balancing classes together that you instead could just DO in 5e or straight up homebrew, makes me NEVER want to play 3.5 especially if die hard fans of it act like this all the time. What a bother these DM’s are.
Rogues are all about fighting in underhandedly, that is the whole point of the class! As a DM, if your characters will be fighting for an honorable and righteous side, tell them that they shouldn't play a rogue, or any other character with morally questionable ways of fighting.
Exactly I'm playing a Chaotic Good female Dhampir Assassin Rouge in a 5E homebrew horror/dark fantasy campaign and well I take any chance I get to have her fight dirty take advantage of Spider-Climb and drop down with rapier or both daggers in hand or use the shortbow for a hidden ranged attack that is out of sight due to being in stealth for a sneak attack yes please take advantage of the combo of sneak attack and the Assassinate Feature for massive damage yes I will take that option use her poisoner's kit to craft a neurotoxin that does necrotic damage to a target and coat either one of her daggers, her rapier, or an arrow in it and use it to ensure that enemy dies and suffers in agony while slowly dying hell yes!
Heck I have as part of her personality and bio that she is fine with being seen by the corrupt as a "wicked, dishonorable, bloodsucking seemingly undead monster" and will go to any length and use any tactic honorable or dishonorable including drinking her opponent's blood and using her feminine wiles to ensure the wicked pay for their crimes.
lvl 5 group finds medusa, so i wild shape into a spider with my eyes closed because blindsight, charge the medusa and my dm turns me to stone... before i get into blindsight range... my character gets one-shot and my dm rules the damage focus cleric can heal me if they have heal spells. lucky for me, they supprise my dm because they took one just in case.
2:00 any self-respecting knight exemplar would go out of their way to decurse-ify themselves before this foul relic of darkness gains power over their immortal soul. Furthermore it is the peak of virtue to resist it and continue to act as oneself would despite its vile and putrid influence.
SEE HOW FORCING THE ROGUE TO BE A PALADIN DOESN'T WORK DM
My dm thinks that spellcasters have to many options so is banning absolutely all non phb spells isnt even a thing like banning silvery barbs is just a straight ban to everything outside it
In the other hand all the other players have subclasses from tashas and we even have an artificer
And the worst part is that he absolutely didn't said that before the last session because apparently i have to assume that everyone else having Tasha's content wasn't allowing the spells(That aren't even that good)
Some people should not only never run campaigns, but be shunned and shamed.
A boat will not move with a finger tap, that's why you have to row or use an engine. If a boat could be moved so easily then why did the Titanic get ruined by an iceberg? The weight of the boat matters 🤷♂️ that being said, it seems like a dm could roll with fun ideas like cleverly using skills ✌️
9:57
Sounds fake asf
I really hate when DM's try to take over a character like they did in the second story. Its just terrible DMing. The only time I ever did something close to that was with a problematic player, this wasn't DnD and my first time running a game. I talked with him 4 times about how he was doing way too much damage and he needed to make some kind of change because I had a very difficult time trying to balance fights, what would have been a challenge for him the other PCs wouldn't be able to do anything to. He kept one-shoting things and I needed him to tone it down. I actually had this problem with another player but after talking to him once he changed up his tactics and had so much more fun setting up other players, I was hoping for something similar but no. I had him lose both his weapons and given him something that would have limited his damage. That did help but it felt really bad to railroad the player like that, that is something I'd never do again unless I had to.
tbh get good, balance better
@@deadku6150 He did. Party is now balanced.
0:34 🧢
Maybe its me but i would never dream of telling to dial something their doing back like in one of the last stories. Like i get not everyone get the fail tables can suck and not everyone likes them but they exist for a reason and if a dm wants to use in their game thats their choice
Did they tell them to, or suggest it? It sounded like the latter to me?
@drdca8263 either way it's the same for me. It's their world and their dming how they want. Who is op to try and change that?
@@BurroughsProductions That sounds like you would reject the entire premise of the video then?
@drdca8263 no? Lol the entire video isn't filled with asking the dm to change their entire world and how they dm. Just the one person
@@BurroughsProductions The premise of the video (as indicated by the title of the video) is DMs ‘saying’ “my game my rules” in a bad way. This assumes that it is possible to run things in a way that is worthy of criticism. Doesn’t this imply that some amount of feedback can be appropriate?
Had a DM, that said choice had consequence, my character had become a leader of a region. Prior to that there were certain individuals who had acquired specific powers that had died. There were only three people who had the power living, one was not a true user, the other was my character's best friend.
But one of the first orders he tried to order was to secure the remains that had these powers within their bodies to keep them from being used. The DM ignored that as it became the basis of the next arc.
The following arc, my character was taken to a holy plane. But he was cast out by omniscient beings and the arc was going to be forced to end. He had learned the realm allowed things to be manipulated, by perception and will. So he thought that if the gods of the realm could be convinced to believe something could they collectively made to believe something could they will it to be.
I argued with the DM that because they ignored my command which would have negated the previous arc, that choice and consequence was negated that this arc shouldn't be made null and void and we could work out an alternative. They called me a whiner because I kept pointing out how choice/consequence only ever seemed to be in my negative never positive when listed a little dozen points. She then nuked the discord server we were playing on and blocked me on everything rather than having a conversation.
You kinda sound like graystillplays
*When you're on the casino boat*
ua-cam.com/video/lty-2iLQy9c/v-deo.html
Shame on the uploader for using that "SeXisM" story as the introduction
I also think it would have been better to not start with it, but shame seems a little strong maybe? Well, idk, I guess it is a figure of speech?
Playing a gnoll cleric who was raised by humans-in society-so she never took on any of the socialized traits of standard gnolls. She's married, and absolutely devoted to her wife, who's waiting at home for her to finish her holy duties and come back to her. Is so devoted and enamored she'll talk your ear off at the slightest opportunity, about how great her wife is; but not to the point she annoys people with it when it wouldn't be appropriate. Rest of the party actually finds it adorable, and encourages her.
Cut to about session five or so. Party's making our way through an allegedly-abandoned old fort, investigating rumors of recent disappearances. Accompanied by a handful of NPC's of varying professions. Keep encountering random wild animals, but no real threats. At one point, we make camp within the moldering fort, and are merrily socializing around the campfire as we make something for dinner. Archeologist NPC approaches our gnoll gal and tries to hit on her. I have the cleric tell him she's very flattered, but she happens to be married...and a lesbian. To my utter bemusement (no, that's *not* a synonym for amusement), the DM proceeds to roll a d20. And gets a nat 20. Proceeds to inform me that the NPC has successfully wooed my cleric, and will be making hanky panky. I protest that 1, the DMG makes it pretty blatantly clear that "when a character is attempting to persuade a PC, dice should *never, ever* be rolled; the player being persuaded needs to be...well...persuaded!" is the *one rule* in the entire book, that is *not* a suggestion or guideline...2, even if I'd agreed to allow a dice roll, nat 20 on anything other than an attack roll is not a guaranteed success, just the character doing the absolutely, positively best they possibly could...3, the gnoll is very VERY much devoted, loyal, and not into guys. He *actually says* "my game, my rules." Word for word.
Packed my crap and left. Found out later he tried to have an NPC version of my gnoll get freaky with the archeologist, anyway, but the other players all shut that down right away. Joke's on him, too, because my gnoll was the only healer in the party, and the players blamed HIM for the lack, and his campaign fell apart entirely, soon after.
>Lesbian character
Lol. Lmao, even
I… I don’t see how you being in darkness would give you advantage if they know the darkness hides an archer. Like, the rule about darkness is because they can’t see the arrow coming, but if you’re firing out of the darkness they can still see the arrow. It’s not a bullet, it doesn’t move so fast you can’t react. If they were in darkness then yeah, perfect set up, but like they described i would side with the DM
Our dm is great overall but i wish a nat20 would always be a nat 20 even if there is nothing to investigate at least let us discover some mundane extra detail with zero effect but for RP immersion
A "nat 20" is only relevant in combat, where a 20 is always a succesful attack, regardless of the enemies AC, and does additional damage. In all other circumstances, such as investigation checks, it merely represents "the best possible outcome you can achieve". If there's nothing to find, the best possible outcome is still "there's nothing to find."
It's also only the best YOU can achieve; if something has a DC of 25, and you've got a +3 bonus to the check, you quite simply cannot succeed.