For the AITA post. That was SUCH a minor reminder about rules. Also, there is no “failure” in D&D. Like sure, the party failed there objective but that just means their next quest is breaking their teammate out of jail. They didn’t lose, the goalpost just got moved.
Yep. if the GM wasn't ready for it breaking the Fly, he should not have cast it. I don't care if he's expecting it to be countered. He put it in the game world. It's not the player being the asshole to make sure the game is run properly.
Also, if I'm correct in assuming the situation based on how OP described it, dude was probably hauling ass in the air at about 40 mph, 80 if he was dashing, so there was plenty of room to rule of cool it with that kind if forward momentum
For the AITA: I’m the person at my table who reminds people when they have advantage or disadvantage (because somehow they just forget), how spells work when it’s asked, etc. when it’s in their favor, when it isn’t. When it’s in my favor, and when it isn’t. My friends kinda see me as a living encyclopedia rather than a rules lawyer, and I try to ask the gm with rules questions what he wants to do because ultimately he has final say. This prevents the assholish nature of rules corrections because it still leaves the power up to the dm, but since the dm is kinda newer to 5e and I’ve been playing for 6 years, sometimes he doesn’t know how stuff workes RAW so I tell him “this is what it says, this is what is theoretically allowed, but if you like a different interpretation then we go with that” or something along those lines. I don’t think this guy is the asshole because I don’t think I’m an asshole. I just think he may need to learn what I had to, and play with a group that doesn’t mind knowing what the rules are
I am much the same. If the GM says Hold Person would only render me immobile I remind them that it gives the Paralyzed/Incapacitated condition, which means I do lose the spell. Whenever I play any class I always have tabs up to conditions, effects, abilities, spells, etc so there are never any questions as to how things work. On the flipside, I am very okay if my GM says that for this instance, they want it to work a specific way. If they're the GM, they can make that change.
Yeah for some reason the d&d community has forgotten what the term rules lawyer means. It used to refer to a person with encyclopedic knowledge of the rules when it benefited them, who conveniently forgot them whenever it would harm them. Knowing and reminding others of the rules isn't bad. And if you want to break/bend the rules just say so.
i got this DnD DM who dislikes when i remind them (according to him is immersion) but he also makes it funny that its ONLY in combat where is an issue 😂
Also, I don't think OP is the asshole. Just the whole situatio went downhill quickly. I agree with Duke when he said that the DM should've just said "I'll let it slide" to the table instead of keeping it to himself.
Yeah. I think I’d add some absolute drama preserving handicap like “Your concentration ends but you begin to will yourself to keep the ranger afloat long enough to get them out” and let the dice decide how far astray they end up before the spell truly ends. Is it DM fudging to ensure the original outcome that they intended? Yeah. And I think the table would have picked up on it. But it’s a nice way to keep the intended outcome, saving this embarrassment, and might allow for some interesting emergent stories (e.g. ranger ends up a little out of the way and everyone has to launch a small rescue operation to get them back.
When DMing in my games, I have a solution to this. In my games, Hold Person doesn't break concentration. It never made sense to me that it should. It doesn't effect you mental state. Your mind still works, thus you can still concentrate
@@asumax8 It says under 'Paralyzed' that the creature is 'Incapacitated.' Incapacitation is effectively KO'd without the need to be at 0 HP. You're unconscious, so you cannot concentrate. When Hold Person is removed, your paralysis is removed and you are no longer incapacitated. And if you look up the rule for Concentration, it does say Concentration is automatically broken when Incapacitated.
@@THEGRUMPTRUCK I know it says that, thats why I say we run in differently. Especially since most people roleplay being under the effects of Hold Person/paralyzed as still being conscious. Also incapacitated does not mean you are unconscious. It says you cannot take actions or reactions. When you aee paralyzed you are incapacitated. When unconscious you are incapacitated, but when incapacitated, you are not necessarily unconscious.
On the first story: the whole "Secret Background" can be fun, but it has to be seeded. I openly discuss my backstory with other players at the table, but we also maintain the separation to character knowledge. Another player had secret royal lineage as part of his backstory, and by the time it was fully revealed, we had plenty of moments of "wait, WTF was that? Why are you acting like that?" For her, I'd think it'd be far more fun to be almost obvious about it, just playing THE shadiest MFer, but brush off any questions or accusations. We all know the character type, where people know to just not ask too many questions. Make the final reveal be more about confirming EXACTLY which mafia this character is in, not THAT they're in the mafia.
oh i'm playing a character pretty much exactly like that in one campaign. gnome rogue with his backstory being that he got kicked out of the thieves' guild of westgate and now they want him dead. he's shady af but never actually confirmed anything, even though he's been referred to as thief by a guard (was just some questions, though, bigger problems) and he had a scene where he went off on his own to pick some pockets and is often coming up with various schemes and conspiracies.
I just think too many people got into DnD by way of the Mighty Nein (Critical Role Campaign 2), and bought into this idea that your secrets are a big part of campaigns and everyone is super into RP. Everyone needs a big shocking reveal. And that just isn't true for 95% of tables.
@@hoid9407 I guess it didn't HELP the situation, but I had plenty of cases of this decades before M9 ever existed. They do it because it was a pre-existing trope in both fiction and rpg spaces. Lots of players like being super special. Even the non-RP types might dig into it to justify all their wacky powers. It's just one of those things that doesn't always play at a TABLE as well. Partly because in a story, you as the writer can move the unknowing characters to tease and taunt this idea. You can have scenes with just the secret haver revealing SOMETHING is up, even if not the full reveal. And if you've got a solid table, that is EXACTLY what you should do. Let the PLAYERS have the juicy bits even if their characters don't know. Have public scenes with the GM that hint at the details and let them go full Pepe Silvia on it. Or just flat out tell them as player knowledge to maximize incidents as a light form of meta-gaming.
I had a character that was a changeling rogue who was adopted by a ship captain and took on the identity of his daughter who had died, so she had been living as this young woman full time for several years until she was found out by her adoptive father's crew and attacked, he got killed, she was thrown overboard and left for dead, and her backstory was she wanted to get revenge and her adoptive father's ship back, which she was open about, but understandably hid her being a changeling, so I was obviously not using human racial stats and not trying to exactly hide it but dropping hints (mentioning I have darkvision or can't be put to sleep, mentioning my abnormally high CHA modifier for a rogue, etc) and I had previously agreed with the DM that if my character gets knocked unconscious, she would revert back to her natural form when she took her first death saving throw, so the DM could sort of decide if the reveal was taking too long and target my character in combat to have the truth come out "naturally". I would have been pissed if my party had been spoiled by a nosy metagamer too, especially if the DM apologized with the 😢 emojii, but I wouldn't have left the group over it, I thinks that's just an overreaction
yeah keeping it secret from the PLAYERS... that is a nono for me. Cuz if the idea that your character is actually big bad evil's henchman.. if that just comes out of nowhere... why!? I've had more than one game die out cuz someone wanted to have big-secret 'so cool' backstory thing, and it either got leaked or it was some stupid backstabby stuff, etc.
About the AITA post: I have this strong feeling that the DM in that game is lying about having been aware of the interaction and just making all of that up after the fact to save face. As said in the video, the DM could have just let it slide if that was his intention from the start.
I have a secret back story but it is because me as a player and character doesn’t know and the dm is revealing it to me through the campaign and it’s really cool
oh that's so much fun. had a character like that, who even had a bit of amnesia about it. there were occasional hints, like feeling like he knew someone's face or seeing his face on a wanted poster. the reveal was awesome, when the whole memory came back and then having to deal with the consequences.
“In my defense, if we had to cheat to win, it feels like an undeserved success.” That… pretty much sums up the reason why I tend to rules lawyer or Dm closely to the rules. Now rule of cool still applies and if the dm says otherwise so be it of course, always check with DM and let them decide. Also I feel like it’s fair play if a person doesn’t know how a rule works, give them a chance to redo what they were gonna do. Letting them do something and going, “well you already did it even though you didn’t know,” always feels shallow to me. Though I will admit it was a very… surreal experience during combat, another player was trying to do something but didn’t remember how it worked, and neither did the dm. I just hear them call my name while I was planning my next turn and the dm asked, “hey so how does this work?” So apparently I’m the group’s rule and spell codex.
Being asked to stop correcting about rules, and being called upon to explain a rule in the same session is a surreal experience I've had once or twice.
For the rules lawyering. If the DM wanted you to succeed, he could have said the ranger lands between the party and the guards, allowing the party to grab him and the relic.
@jlaw131985 Not specifically in the spell no, but it gives you the "paralyzed" condition, which counts as being "incapacitated," and you can not concentrate on spells while Incapacitated.
@@gotelc yeah, I went and checked. They really should note that on the incapacitated condition also. I know they don’t like replicating things, but it’s honestly just much easier. I think everyone I know misses that effect.
NTA, and In defence of Rules Lawyers: 1) I am the Rules Lawyer/Note Taker of my group. I also DM. From a DM's perspective, having a player help keep track of things is great to have, and I'm pretty good at memorization but no way I have every rule memorized. Having someone to help fact check is great. 2) As a writer, verisimilitude is important, and maintaining consistency with rules helps keep the world consistent. So if it's not done to the level of constant nagging, I feel that having a Rules Lawyer can be helpful in that way. 3) I completely empathize with the "feels like cheating" sentiment. The satisfaction of winning a game, especially ones that involve planning/strategizing, comes from fairness on a level playing field, so that it feels like you earned the win. It would be no fun to win a game of chess where you only had to put your opponent in check once, but they still had to checkmate you normally.
Absolutely. Also, as soon as you let your players know you’re super fudging stuff, they stop trusting you, or the intense moments feel cheaper. Consistency and honesty is importan
I support your points, but I think you misjudge yourself. I think that you are not a Rules Lawyer, but are instead (like myself) a Rules Public Defender. The difference is the former uses the rules as a way to only benefit themselves, while the latter brings up rules for the sake of fairness, consistency, and the benefit of the group.
I agree with this. I've called the person that helps rules even if it bites them in the ass the rules attorney as it's not being used maliciously or for benefit. Just to be helpful. I would also have Siad the same thing if the dm had forgot. I dislike the idea of being given a "gimme" The plan had risks and if it didn't then what was the point of it. The real feeling of success is how ya handle the curve balls
To the rules lawyer, as a DM myself one work around I may have tried is that “sure the spell ends, but the wizard is able to use residual magic to turn it into a sort of glide, rather than just drop” but even then, there’s a lot of different ways this could have played out, it’s not wrong (unless someone’s being a jerk about being a rules lawyer) to point out when a “rule” is broken
@@jlaw131985 yes it does. It gives you the paralyzed condition, which gives you the incapacitated condition, which ends concentration. Fly is a concentration spell.
@@TheNightVeil Rather then looking at the incapacitated condition, look at the Concentration break down. According to Concentration, and I quote "You lose concentration on a spell if you are incapacitated or if you die." It is a bit confusing since Incapacitation doesn't mentioned Concentration, but Concentration does list Incapacitation as something that breaks it. Hope this helps.
@@Archaesinthewrongroom yeah, they really should list it on the condition, it would even take minimal replication which they hate. Everyone I know messed this up and I went and checked afterwards.
Arguably the "rules lawyer" could find a DM more in line with their values, but as a DM, I agree with Duke that the main fault for this situation was actually the DM. The DM could have made the call in the moment and had more respectful communication afterward (though it's true that the player could have communicated afterward better too, rather than just showing the post), but also, a DM shouldn't be so adverse to the party failing - it will happen. And getting a member captured doesn't really sound that bad - that actually sounds like an exciting situation to try to get out of it next time.
One thing I've learned over many years of being a DM: let stuff happen. In this situation, the intent of the DM might have been to let them succeed, but the unexpected failure can lead to just as, if not more, interesting stories. Now the party has to plan a jailbreak! Never get so caught up in what you planned as a DM that you adjust how things work with mechanics or fudge dice rolls. A ton of the fun of D&D is the chaos and unexpected turns the story can take.
For the AITA post, if the DM was going to let it slide, they should have still let it slide and come up with an in story reason why in this case, concentration was not broken. The DM can also say that the group got lucky in this case implying that concentration would normally be broken in the future. Every D&D game is a homebrew to some extent and the Rule of Cool can always trump the rules if the DM calls it that way.
First story: Keep secrets from characters, not players. It is very frustrating how the DM messed that up. I'm not familiar with the tools he used, but either this information should have been listed on a private page, or not have been on the wiki at all. I'm also annoyed at how the player handled that. I have stumbled over campaign spoilers before, by reading something about a module's npc by accident. Kept my mouth shut over it ever since. It's not that hard. That said, as Duke and Wife explained, secrets limit you in your roleplay, and the Big Reveal will likely never happen as you want it. Instead, it would have been great to at least drop some hints to the other players at the start. Like, 'my character is a member of a secret guild'. Imagine your character sneaking off in the evening, to meet up with a contact from that guild. Let the other players get a taste of the secret, while their characters are utterly oblivious. But remember: No plan survives contact with the players. That goes for DMs as much as for other players. Metagaming aside, if you act shifty, players will try to figure out why, and try to guess your secret long before you feel ready to reveal it. This situation should hopefully not ruin DnD for you. This group may not be the best for you, but next time you play, consider playing a character that isn't built around keeping big secrets.
This. Yeah it sucks that the players found out, but that doesn't have to ruin the reveal in game. In fact, it might help because the others got a chance to prepare their character reaction. At the end of the day, they're roleplaying too. It's awesome if you can catch the player out with a surprise, but generally makes the in game moment less involved. They're busy rethinking what they know for valid reasons. Badly handled by the DM and other player? For sure, but this shouldn't be the big issue. I could get being mad at someone metagaming, given it's been a topic before, but not because the secret is out in real life.
Best way that big reveal would happen is if there's possibly a secret-traitor that the players know might be any of the players, but no one are aware which, even the traitor until 'that moment', and whomever is the traitor gets a new character the moment it happens. Works well for one-shots and whatnot.
I like how they're talking in the first bit about how players will hold onto their backstory secrets and then not get involved in the game because I see that a lot. It takes someone very good at like improv and redirection to still be engaged with the other players, while still holding onto these massive secrets if it's done well, it could be incredible but the trick is learning to do it. Well redirection is such a good friend for these things like you could still engage with the other players well redirecting away from topics that your character doesn't wanna talk about the same way you would in person
Fun story: First time DM and doing LMoP campaign. I Put my players in the feywild after being ambushed at their camp in the woods by a group of faerie dragons at a fey crossing. They got knocked out and awoke in "a strange and vibrant world that they've never seen before. Merely breathing the air seems to be pleasurable". They proceeded to wander around in the feywild and investigate the area, finding strange and mysterious local flora and fauna. Vibrant biting flowers, talking trees, etc. They eventually came to a door that had strange images carved on the surface in a cross pattern. Each image was in a section, and portrayed somebody doing an iconic dance move. Namely, the chicken dance, the disco, the twerk, and the cotton eye joe. Next to the door was a carcass. They inspected the carcass and a little tooth faerie sputtered out. They attacked it, and it gave off a screeching cry in its death throws, causing a swarm of them to respond in the distance. I let my players know that a large buzzing sound could be heard off in the distance and sounded as if it were getting closer. I had in my mind 10 rounds of game play time before they would arrive, with them being able to be seen as an amorphous black cloud in the sky when there were 6 turns left. The players finally decided to inspect the door more enthusiastically knowing something was amiss. They kept saying their characters would mimic the image, causing the icon to faintly glow but fade immediately after. It was only when they asked for my npc, a doppelganger still in disguise for a grand reveal later, to do the dance, that the icon stayed lit for a round before fading. It took them two rounds of watching me physically do the cotton eye joe dance did they finally piece it together. The look of horror when they realized they had to do the chicken dance and twerk among other things was totally worth it. They narrowly escaped being devoured alive by tooth fairies, like that scene in Hellboy 2. After they closed the door behind them, they found themselves inside a cavern labyrinth posing riddle questions with a devious leprechaun as a guide. When the riddle would be answered a door would open on either the left or right side. If wrong, they were met with a combat encounter, if right they were rewarded with a small prize such as a healing potion. The dungeon ended with a word search kind of test. The floor was tile, and each had a letter. They had to walk on the proper letters to get to the other side of a trap would trigger for each incorrect tile. The riddle read: Before the flame, must come the spark, before anything is done, you'll need this before you start. The answer was Motivation. It was a fun filler session as we were missing half our group at the time. Just wish everybody got to enjoy it. Hope somebody reads this and decides to try it for themselves 😊
About that second story, I was in a campaign once where my character was the only one who could understand the Kenku Cleric. (This was pre-mordenkainens, so we still went with the rule that they had to basically speak only in mimicry and communicate in other ways.) My Barbarian was the only one who could understand because he communicated through interpretive dance and every single time people rolled Insights to understand him, I never rolled lower than an 18, despite most of my other rolls for anything else being relatively average. I guess the gods just wanted me to be able to understand and relay his intent to the party.
We had, for a high level homebrew campaign, two fey of opposing courts (my unseelie warlock and the seelie pixie sorc), and a succubus bard that was made for the meme and pretended to be a human. The issue with the succubus, was that my character had that one invocation that effectively gives truesight, and promptly had to pull our "regular woman" aside to go "Hey I get it if you're trying to hide this, but I CAN see you. Can we use this for a prank or something?" Eventually the DM did work in our backstories and we found out the Warlock and Sorc were both related to the same person (Sorc's sister married Warlock's brother) and it became a neat little side quest, but the one "big secret" character got IMMEDIATELY outed due to one invocation, and we all rolled with it since we enjoyed the rp each thing brought out. The differences being that it wasn't metagaming, and we all knew eachother beforehand and had been playing together for the better part of a decade (mostly, sorc was new but he fits right in)
For the big secret post: In my opinion, holding onto secrets is much more for the person holding them than the people receiving them, if that makes sense. For me, I'm a HUGE role-player who makes creative backstories for my characters, whether the DM uses them or not. And as a DM I absolutely connect players' backstories to the plot - it's a great way to immerse people in the game. However, the "big reveals" don't always happen like they do on streamed/recorded DND sessions (Critical Role, Dimension 20, etc.) where everyone's freaking out. And that's what people forget sometimes. For the AITA post: NTA. The party can't win all the time. There wouldn't be much of an interesting plotline if they just succeeded with everything they tried to do. However, rules lawyers also need to be careful with how much they bring up rules - especially if they're not the DM. Sometimes the DM will rule something that's different than what players expect. I did that in one of my campaigns and had one of my players message me after the session, quite upset and wanting to argue my logistics call (the result of which didn't really change much in the long-term game) because they had proof I did it wrong. It zapped my confidence as a DM and took the fun out of planning for the campaign. Communication between DM and players on how rules will be run (and honestly communication in general) is so important and can really make or break a game.
As someone who does rules lawyer a bit, it's important to always either leave DM veto on the table "paralyzed usually breaks concentration, unless there is a DM veto" and/or perhaps ask it as a question "doesn't being paralyzed break concentration?". Just, always try to allow the DM or whoever an out if they need it
I am the kind of person who checks things like this, if I dont know them, behind the scenes and then, instead of outright revealing it, asks whether we're supposed to accept this as homebrew or if they made a mistake. That way, I try to let a lot of things just fly, while also getting a definitive answer about whether is is going to keep happening in the future. And even then our DM sometimes goes "Nah you're right" and retcons the last 10 Minutes of play to replay the situation with the correct rules. Edit: The Problem with not saying anything, is that it creates problems in the future, when you want to apply the same logic to enemies, and it then works differently. If the group encounters a flying enemy in the future, they wouldnt even try hold person, because they'd assume it works the same as when the enemies tried it on them.
AITA post: OP spouts rule DM me: Wizard, how important is concentrating on fly to your character right now? Wizard: Extremely. The rangers life is on the line. Me: Enough to down yourself? Wizard: yes Dm: as the ranger lands on the ground, the Wizard falls to 0hp.
I do what AITA OP did nearly every session. Sometimes it annoys others, sometimes it's useful. I'm not as concerned about if we win or lose as making sure the outcome was earned. If we win, I'll celebrate, but I'd take an honest loss over a cheated victory any day. If the DM acknowledges it and overrules anyway, I drop it immediately. When things typically get the most heated are either when I've lost focus and forgotten a house rule again, or when others at the table insist that their house rule is what the book says.
Story 1: Weather the secret is a major character element or a minor one, I tend to focus on how they would either avoid or shift the focus away from the subject. I find that if you address it in common broad strokes (like quipping about how stingy your mom was, or how strict your dad was), or shift the focus of your character's surface motivations to the present task, then you can leave others feeling like you're not hiding things at all
also player knowledge is not character knowledge. and the DM is free to go 'no your character would not do that cuz they are not aware of this, just because you are'... and it works the same way around. Just cuz you as a player missed a detail or forgot 'oh right, concentration on this spell will break if my character does this' and thusly not punishing the character for something the player forgot... LET THEM ROLL, the character has STATS, they are NOT the player after all.
Paused after you read the AITA post. As someone who has trouble with my rules lawyer tendencies myself, I agree with OP in that the whole thing would've felt like an undeserved success if I had just let it slide. Would've done the same thing and not regretted it.
Hell, in my game, my chars backstory is that his prior group was wiped out. Imagine my SHOCK when the DM made it so that one member of my group basically sold us out and is now working for the cult who killed my former group and is now making my new group's life....difficult. Well damn, good on my DM!
For the AITA post: I don't think he was in the campaign. However, he 100% is for sharing his post with his group. Kind of a "I told you I was right" moment. Should have definitely approached it all differently
This is why I have an insane luck roll. I DM a very very homebrew DND adventure for the older two kids I watch (12 and 9) they have so much fun creating their characters and enjoy solving puzzles more than the actual combat. But because I'm new to the game myself, I mess up sometimes. Or one of the kids rolls impossibly bad over and over again. And, they're just kids. So I had them find a lucky rock. Whoever has it can use it for a luck roll after everything else has failed. It has unknown consequences. One time they planned to use a cave in to kill a monster and I warned them that they were still in the cave too. One boy was worried, the other was already casting fireball. They got caved in but weren't squished. I figured they'd move the rock after a few tries and it'd be fine.
I WAS WRONG. Strength checks failed. Wisdom checks failed. I even did a dex check because, like, maybe they wiggled their way out?? But no. So they used their lucky rock. Finally, finally there was a good roll. A mouse on the mountain in top of the cave kicked a little rock which hit a bigger rock ECT, till the boulders in front of the cave cleared. They're free, but I warn them that there will eventually be a price to pay for such unnatural luck, and that the more they use it, the higher that price will be.
My best reveal moment of my character never was the one who was obvious that I try to hide but de subtle one that hide behind it. One of my Character was a Drow disguise at a Hight elf Woman when they discover he was a Drow it wasn't a big deal but the surprise but when they discover he was a Man their surprise face was perfect.
I think for the big secret ruined story, if your backstory gets accidentally revealed like that then find a way to bring what happened irl into the rp. What if not just the person was digging around irl but his character also was doing some "digging" offscreen basically and he found out this fact and then you take that as a way to make the big reveal like he calls out your character next session and your character is on the spot having to come clean. Sounds like something to work with the DM and the 2 players and you can craft it into a cool reveal that way.
For the AITA post. Would have ruled it as "Okay, flying stops due to paralysis of the wizard as they cannot hold concentration, assuming he is still falling 50 ft with a momentum of moving forward 60 ft per 6 seconds, and within a round a player would fall 200 ft per round as per the rules, let us assume he drops to about 30 ft forward."
People obsessed with rules are the worst. One time I created a warlock who sold her voice for magical powers, creating a little mermaid story... And my DM told me "Fu, most spells require incantations". I came up with multiple solutions - Morse alphabet, making noises with something else than her mouth, or even just decide what specific part of her body was changend [vocal cords, lips, tongue] and with that she would still be able to make noises with her mouth, just couldn't talk to others. Later I thought about other stuff [that I don't remember rn] and my DM still said no, because "rules say incantations!". Total creativity killer.
In a game I play, every once in a while, one of our characters will get controlled by a bad guy. And we have a rule where we are to attack the closest person or cause the most amount of damage if we are to attack PCs this way. My artificer had gotten controlled for a round and even though there was someone about 10-15ft, I had shatter and my highest spell slot. There was three other PCs in shatter range so I cast shatter at the three players. We were cracking up laughing at it. This has also happened to me in the campaign. So no hard feelings.
me: "my character will have a great backstory he won't share with anyone until it comes up!" also me: *in character trauma dumps onto the rest of the party by session 3* 😂 edit: for the AITA post: i fully agree with OP, he did the right thing, DnD is not just a story telling medium it is also a game and only winning because you cheated or someone cheated on your behalf feels cheap, I'd rather mess up and having to find a way out of the situation than just succeed because a DM deliberately forgot a rule, i don't think there's anything wrong with bringing up rules that might be to the detriment of your party, it bothers me way more when people only conveniently remember the rules when it is in their favor
I actually did that one, pointing out a forgotten rule and felt really bad about it and just asked... so uh.. about this rule? should I just... not mention it further... or? And the DM was actually just happy I'd made mention of it and incorporated a reason as to why the rule was not applicable (I sadly do not recall the specifics), and I was happy. There was a reason beyond 'cuz DM said so' and that was all I really needed.
I played in a campaign where there was a sect of changelings that were essentially the illuminati. I played a changeling cleric who defected and was on the run, and obviously didn't want anyone to know he was a changeling because eyes are everywhere and one slip up can mean that he's found. In session 0 i mentioned that i was playing a changeling, but when we had session 1 the next week, it was obvious that no one remembered that he was a changeling. It turned into a fun game for the DM and I to see who could figure it out. Even going so far as to make a new rule that when unconscious (death saves, specifically) my character would drop his appearance and appear in his natural form. 3 fights i go into death saves in 6 months of the campaign, and everyone failed a perception check to see that the human cleric was not in fact human. I ended up doing a big reveal to the party after those 6 months and it was pandemonium. Probably the best way a secret backstory could have played out, despite trying to make it obvious from day 1.
Reminding the paralyzed failure thing I would have done the same thing because everyone forgets even the DM and and the DM can say"im waving this for dramatic reasons" or something because everyone forget things all the time and you are trying to play a game. I've done the same thing and forgetting the mechanic and remembering later makes you feel so much worse.
I'm kinda a rules lawyer player, I try to tone it down but there are times I double check cause as much as I want to see something succeed I want to make sure it's "realistic." I admit I don't know everything, my knowledge is generally in player character skills, spells, and game mechanics. When it comes to monsters or homebrew I can only begin to guess what's about to happen. The big thing I've learned is that if the dm allows something that normally doesn't work make it clear if it's a one time thing or if it's consistent. And if the group isn't sure or can't remember how something works as written I look it up and explain it, but I leave the dm to make the final call in case they want to change it.
I don't know if anyone was at fault during the AITA, sometimes you just get excited about remembering something and don't realize the consequences of rules lawyering at the moment. I would say that if it's a repeated problem talk to the player on the side and remind them that while the rules are important, the DM is the arbitrator of the rules and can decide when certain aspects of rules impede the narrative being told and allow them to bend. If I were the DM, I would have given the Ranger a moment when they feel themselves falling where they could try to do something before the consequences of landing in front of a certain capture occurred, like throwing the relic or perhaps casting Featherfall. I wouldn't explicitly say "I'm bending the rules in your favor by not breaking concentration", I would play off as if that was information I had forgotten about the spell. Handwaving like you're recommending would make it feel like the DM is trying to push the narrative a certain way, rather than letting player choices dictate the outcomes. I go back to my saying of "Tools, not Chains". The rules are there as a set of tools to help shape the way a story goes. They are not there to be the ultimate arbitrator of every action, chaining us to the rulebooks. You will never find the rule for "I want to aim for cutting the Titan's hand off so he can't snap and destroy half the universe", the DM has to come up with a rule on the spot for if it's a higher AC attack to aim, a separate DEX check to aim, a damage threshold to remove use of the arm, or an athletics check to cut through the muscle and bone.
There is a HUGE difference between "OH SHIT that will break your concentration!" in a chocked way while it is happening and just stating facts in order to just be a smartass.
Funny story about a backstory reveal: One of my players(Rogue) has a character who got into a really bad fight with an NPC which left both with scars. Rogue's scar was revealed and the party was told about the battle was received. A few sessions later, they're going to cross paths with NPC again. Rogue: Whelp, time to confront my brother, NPC Party: Your what?! Rogue: Yeah...Did I not mention that part? Party: Yes! Full details And that's how the rogue's full backstory got told to the party
On the don't reveal backstory post. I am in a champaign that has a character who even he doesn't know his full backstory. I know some parts, but my DM has helped me by adding some flair to it.
I'm in my first TTRPG (DnD) campaign ever, and my character also had a secret concerning their identity. I felt it'd be nice for the players to interact naturally not knowing about my backstory, so I kept it a secret for over a year. I was fine with telling them if they'd pushed for it or it was logical in the story and just RP-ed keeping that in mind. Once we got to the point where I had to confide in them who my PC really was, the other players were al very happy I did it this way, so they could more easily feel what their characters felt. And how they could think back to my PCs interactions and how it makes sense given who/what I really was. So, IMHO, I think it's fine to have a PC with a secret, but it should more define how you RP and what your character's reasoning/actions would be, than be something you want to hold on to for that one moment. I had ideas on how my secret could be found out by the other PCs and it went in a COMPLETELY different direction, but I just ran with it, and everything turned out to feel very natural and logical given the circumstances. (My PC turned Cleric of Tymora and I even in some sessions flipped a coin (three times total over a few session) to ask Tymora if I should just tell them, but got three "no"-s which made for pretty fun RP-ing)
For the AITA post i would've also 100% done the same thing. It would've been dishonest to NOT point out the rules interaction. And you shouldn't want to have to play dishonestly. It is part of the unspoken agreement of the game that you will point out these interactions even if they're bad for you and the DM will do the same (like reminding you that you forgot hunter's mark on the BBEG even though that would help take it down in one shot or something. Or that this rule technicality benefits you in some way). That's why am a bit of a "rules lawyer". Because i want to be honest with the rest of the table and help them remember the rules. They're my friends. It would be rude to do so otherwise.
For the first story, my immediate thought was that the reason the player was upset that the other players knew their secret back story is because they were going to betray the group in some way & now that they know, it'll be harder. I could be wrong & all the heist movies I've watched have warped my view. For the AITA story, I don't think the player is in the wrong for pointing that out, in the games I've played in or run, there have been many times when players will get caught up in the combat & forget something like that. Usually, someone will point it out & whoever is running the game will ask the player if that's what they want to do or do they want to change it. Then it's up to the player to decide. I do think OP is a bit of an assh*le for showing the others because it does seem like they did it as a way to show the group that they were right. And I completely agree with not assuming what players are going to do. Whenever someone asks me for tips on being a DM I always tell them: When presented with options A, B, or C, players will choose option Q. I've been in these situations as a DM & I'm usually the player who picks option Q
I feel like there's more to the AITA story. As others have said, that's such a small thing. I feel like that wasn't the first incident, and it's been festering for awhile.
For the aita post, i would probably have asked my dungeon master about it and asked if we were doing book rules or the first rule in the dragon of icespire peak rules book: "whatever the dungeon master says goes."
In situations regarding rules and game mechanics, I always just ask the DM: "hey, can we do it this way?" and especially for situations where it might affect other players we have our private messenger app ready to text each other to talk such things over (even when we're playing in person and are sitting at the same table). This prevents situations like in the AITA section. Even though in my opinion, if it was just what the guy claimed that happened, I would not be offended by that as another player. If I where in his shoes I would have formulated it as a question: "hey, doesn't rule xyz apply here or do we make an exception?" And I would have done that by silently texting the DM.
So, their Ranger didn't die he was only captured, and their initial cavalier attempt to get the relic was thwarted, but the mission is absolutely still salvageable, with a daring rescue to boot? Sounds to me like their adventure got a lot more interesting... I think their initial reaction was a little harsh, especially 'keep your mouth shut' guy. I'm all for rule of cool, the option that's more fun for everyone is better, and in this particular story, them being stopped quite dramatically, with the ranger plummeting into the enemy's clutches literally 1 turn from victory, and now they get to come up with a rescue plan, AND a way to get the relic at the same time?? Like damn that's an awesome turn for the adventure to take! In this case that setback means there's a lot more character stuff to explore too, like getting revenge on the Inquisitor, maybe the ranger gets a nasty scar or something badass, so much storytelling potential can be created by defeats... provided they aren't TPKs that is.
For the rules one, as someone who's DM'ed a little bit, I might have the player make a saving through; Either a spell save, or a save based on their spell casting modifier (i.e. Wis., Str, Int, Chrm) so that the flyer can have a chance to keep concentration. But then as a player, if I thought of that while it was happening I wouldn't have mentioned anything.
😂 I had to comment on the first story, I’m in that EXACT situation, planning to change class to paladin in a later scene with DM, other player figures it out off a COIN i nonchalantly asked him for, one “Delete this shit now” meme later and we saved my secret lol the other 3 don’t know
The secret backstory thing. I always find if the twist being spoiled ruins everything. Then it feels like u didn't have much confidence in your character on their own. Though I can emphasize that it can suck when someone finds it out beforehand, especially by metagaming. And the player who rules lawyered is not the asshole. Things going wrong and needing to think on the fly is when things get interesting. And now they have to break a ranger out of prison. The rest of the group needs to realize that these moments are opportunities. Also, I am also the one who hates to succeed from cheating.
With regards to the "big backstory reveal", I've actually had it happen once - the GM and I managed to keep my character's backstory a secret from both the other characters AND the players for six months, revealed it at a particularly impactful moment, and it was glorious. That said, nowadays if I have a "secret" in my backstory, I take it as incumbent upon me, the player, to have my character "accidentally" let things slip or otherwise clue the other players in that there's something going on here. Or ask them to make insight checks to tell that my character is being deceitful. Because if no one ever finds about about the deep, dark secret, then that's withholding fun from everyone, including me.
Okay, for the AITA, since I'm the only person on planet normal, OP is TA, and here's why: A lot of the time people forget that DND is a game. And what is the point of a game? To have fun. The DM even admitted in this situation that he purposefully ignored it. Judging by the group's response, OP singlehandedly ruined the fun they were having. Being a rules lawyer is okay, and even helpful in some cases, but being a rules lawyer isn't an excuse to spoil the fun of the game, as that's the main priority.
I wouldn't call myself a defender of the rules, but I often get sidetracked when they perceive it that way after the phrases: "does it work like that...?" or "does it work exactly...?". But I'm just clarifying because I'm not sure I remember correctly
Story 1 is very funny to me cuz i am currently in a campaign, i have a bit of a weird backstory which started when my character was sbout 12 years old, he didnt remember much, where he was, where he came from etc. He did remember his name, how to talk, and other basic thing he learned at school. Now the fun part is, I accidentally heard one of the players talk about my backstory, but i actually dont know what happened before i got struck by lightning and ended up in the forest at around 12 years old. So one of my party members knows where my character is from and why he went to a forest, i dont tho, not in character, but funnily enough, not irl either.
AITA? Story: Honestly I feel like if the DM wanted to let it slide, they could've just let the group decide, or rollback that decision. If the OP is constantly doing this, and is the only one doing it, then I think the frustration is fair. But I also get the OP's perspective and reasoning for at least this instance. But the post should've been kept too themselves.
I had a character with a secret. Session 1 he got knocked out. And the party realised his vitals were off. And hence started him slowly revelaing one after another he was undead. This moment of the dm describing a small detail about my undead masked character’s breath and heartrate led to it. This started in such early game. That my character got their few sessions (like 2 and a half) of being a nontalkative mysterious character before finally admitting to being undead. And then before saying it to more than one he let other characters roleplay a bit too, before finding a quiet moment to roleplay in the reveal.
With the AITA story: My biggest issue with the dm is that he basically let the ranger fall to their doom after op mentioned the rule. I don't know if they casted the hold person spell as they were flying back down, but it definitely pictured op as the bad guy. I would have either let the ranger do a quick dex save to catch himself on the wall or if it was casted before he flew, i would have redconned his jump off the tower and allowed him to think of something else, it would have softened the initial blow and hopefully would have kept the game going on a good note.
The AITA is a classic spirit of the rules vs. letter of the rules debate, and totally depends on the nature of the group. The DM also could have reacted better. "Flying player, you feel the effects of the spell begin to fade, you have only seconds to react, what do you do?" And you bend the story such that the flying player has agency to move to a safer position before falling.
With the first story I think a lot of the blame lies with the DM. They knew they had a player who had a secret in their backstory, and they (presumably, unless this was the first time it happened) knew they had a player who was a meta gamer. It's not like the metagamer found out about OP's backstory via telepathy; the DM had to put something in there for the meta gamer's character to find that revealed OP's secret. If they were going to do something like that, they should have talked to the OP about it first, either to give them a heads up if it was a situation the DM felt was unavoidable, or to check in with them and make sure they were okay with it, and discuss possible legitimate reasons why their character's name wouldn't have been on that list of members.
So! I want to give a bit of advice for people who want to add secrets and reveals that are baked into their backstories, and for this I have some pieces of personal advice that I've started using for my long running campaign characters: First, start off with information that is reasonable for the character to reveal. For example, if a character is a member of the Black Network like the one shown, they may not be forthright with that info, but they *may* be more willing to talk about their life before they joined; stuff like being orphaned at a young age, having to lie, cheat and steal to survive, and eventually finding a group of people that cared about them and helped them persevere. (which can _later_ be revealed as the Zhents) Important thing to note: don't outright lie with this info unless you KNOW your fellow players are good with RP and have enough experience with improv that they can still justify working with someone willing to lie about stuff like that. Next, come up with the information that the character knows, but is intentionally keeping from others they don't trust. This can be anything from ties to evil organizations, to detrimental curses, to horrible actions they've taken in the past. The important thing for this stuff is that, when your character *does* trust their companions, have them start to open up by revealing these things. It doesn't need to be dramatic, just find an appropriate time to mention them. Using the story for example, while session 5 may still be a bit early for a full reveal, it sounds like the party was at a point where having an in with the Zhents would have been beneficial, so having their character go, "I think I can get us an audience with the Black Network... let's just say I know a guy," would be a good, in-character clue towards this, showing a bit of trust without fully revealing everything to these adventurers they just barely met. They could even try and disguise themselves during the audience, or use Thieves Cant during the initial meeting to ask anyone who knew them to keep quiet about their involvement durring negotiations, fun subtle things that hint towards your character's backstory and reward other players for paying attention to the game. Finally, and this is the biggest thing I can suggest for every and all characters, be they shorter or long form campaigns: come up with some mystery that your character *doesn't* know about their past, but *_wants to._* Something that motivates your character to get involved in the adventure, and gives your DM tools to hook your character in. This not only gives _you_ something that you can use to contribute to the overall story of the game you're telling with your friends, but if it's interesting and spicy enough, it may even become focal to the overall narrative if other players learn about it and *also* want to learn about it. Once again, to pull from the above video, maybe the reason the PC is on the adventure with the party is because the Zhentarim lost contact with one of it's core members, who just so happened to be the mentor of the PC, and now she's using the party to try and follow leads involving Zhent sightings to try and find them, which the DM can use to further pull them into the conspiracy surrounding the Dragon Heist. Now, in the Story told, the DM wanted simple backstories and... that's reasonable. However, more often than not, I find that when DMs say simple, they mean like... a couple sentences. I'm not going to lie, I'm absolutely guilty of writing pages upon pages of backstory for my characters, but bear in mind that it can be a bit unreasonable to expect a DM to read ALL of that on top of planning their campaign _as well as_ the adventures within each session. (I absolutely know from experience that having to reference page long backstories can be a *nightmare* when planning sessions with character hooks. So to further illustrate all this in practice, here's a condensed version of a few of my more fleshed out characters in three sentences, one focusing on each principal shown: Gil: A human monk with an affinity for fire and bestial fighting style, Gil was completely self-taught and will do just about anything for wealth. This is because, before he was a human, Gil was really a gold dragon, deemed to greedy and selfish by Bahamut, and was cursed to live the life of a mortal as penance. Gil now wanders the land, searching for some way to prove himself once again worthy of his draconic form... and maybe start amassing a new hoard on the side. Jikaal: A kobold soldier who failed to protect her homeland, Jikaal was thrust hundreds of years into the future as a chosen hero destined to fight the ones responsible for the destruction. Though she does her best to try and find peaceful resolutions, her violent upbringing and quest for vengeance has created a darkness in her that she tries her best to overcome, and sometimes fails. When she fled her home however, she took her three eggs with her, and is now desperately trying to discover what became of her children in her absence. Turner: A young kenku adopted and raised by a high member of the Font of Knowledge, Turner took to studies in magic under the tutelage of the many librarians he met. However, his caretaker went missing after a violent break-in at his home, and all Turner found was a lead lined box with a book, and a note to keep the book from anyone who may use it for ill. Now desperate and paranoid, Turner sets his sight on joining adventurers to help track down his missing father, and maybe figure out what's so dangerous about the book... if he can trust them. (fun fact, this was actually my OWN character from Dragon Heist, and we had another character in the party who was actually a Red Wizard spy, so... yeah, we had a lot of fun skirting around trusting each-other in that game)
DM's knowingly let certain things slide all the time for the purpose of "Because it's more fun!", and since the DM has the final say on everything...if the DM says it, it's now fact in the game. At my table we learned that players should *never* call out or nitpick these kinds of things, even as a joke, unless it benefits the party. If you do this against the party's benefit then the DM will make you specifically catch the brunt of the fallout.
On the AITA post, as a DM, I *prefer* it when my players call out a rule I missed. Just because someone is a DM, doesn't mean they know ALL the rules off the top and it is easy to miss something like a spell effect. I've had moments when I had a boss cast two concentration spells and my party is like--wait, doesn't the other spell end? and then I'm like oh shit, you are right, xyz effect is now over, great news! Shit happens, and if a rules lawyer isn't being ANNOYING about the way they are pointing out things like this, it can be a major help. It can help the players understand the rules; and in some cases, it can help the DM understand the rules too. The trick is how the rules lawyering is presented. It sounds like OP probably does this a fair bit; which indicates that the DM probably "lets rules slide" a fair bit as well. When you have a DM like that, how are you supposed to know when they are purposefully letting a rule slide vs genuinely overlooking a rule by mistake in the heat of the moment? The DM is likely forgetting (purposefully or otherwise) a lot of rules, which doesn't really paint the DM in a very good light, tbh. Either he's new and still learning, which he needs a player like OP--or he's ignoring a good chunk of the rules which is bad for a campaign. Either way, OP is NTA here, at all.
As a player who had a big reveal, (like a miniboss turned out to be my character's brother) it was amazing and provided a huge role play moment. The only thing i could fault the OP on is posting it in a different publically available area. As a DM i have a huge reveal, which my players are smart and probably figured out some of it, but I'm hesitant to post about it bc i dont want it getting back to my players and ruin that moment for them.
I had/have a character with a "secret" backstory (its all out now) but it wasnt intended to be secret per se. She was supposed to be open about it when asked but not long before my first chance, I had been told I was a "spotlight hog" by someone. I had the very unfortunate reaction of going to the extremes and withdrawing entirely, turning my casual pc into a broody one and Im STILL slowly pushing her back out of this.
I ran a supehero game and 3 players had secret back storie and I was spending a lot of time stepping into the other room to discuss the secret parts. So I finally told my group they were all good role players and we had a session called secrets and lies everyone got 30 minutes of solo play where there secret was revealed to the player with the expectation they would not metagame with it. It was fascinating One playing was searching of the AI android his late father had created, another player was a AI android who didn't know thier past.. Independently created no collaboration. So we had a good time revealing and then creating 2 "secrets" for the players.
We're preparing to make a campaign. The dm is putting together the plot and how the campaign will be (since its non combat and wholesome so there isn't a lot of campaigns to compare to.) My character is was just a regular girl in school, kinda weird, no friends, but she's very cute and naive. +2 intelligence -1 wisdom. And my boyfriend's character is a well detailed homebrew character (shark humanoids). And since (from what I've heard) vampires don't need air. So they're best friends (and eachothers only friends since he is very arrogant [in a funny goofy way] ) Her mother is a vampire and when she was 12-14 she turned her daughter into a vampire. She now lives with her dad and has her friend as she tries to become a great wizard and be smart. The first mission is helping a spiritual hippie girl (who will become a close friend) and she will give vampire girl a spell book
As an autistic person: the second person sounds like they might be on the spectrum. Both the desire to play according to the rules ánd the showing the post to the group afterwards. The purpose of showing it is not "who is right?" the purpose is "what is the right answer?" and by having feedback from so many people, that would certainly feel like you've found an answer. I know for myself that I am invested in discussions because I want to find out what the correct answer is, I don't care about being right. In fact, if I'd be wrong, I'd genuinely find it helpful if someone told me and would thank them for telling me. Also, how you feel about letting rules slide occasionally can easily be discussed in a session zero. If it is important to you, bring it up and set up some guidelines and expectations. Otherwise, don't get upset about it happening. You can't expect other people to know your preferences if you've never clearly voiced them. And I'm not sure whether they have an actual need to play according to the rules or genuinely just brought it up because they thought the other person might not be aware, simply thinking that everyone wanted to follow the rules.
Oh the backstory part reminded me of an exellent think I did with my last character. so I had a very traumatic war story as his background that happened quite literally days before the party all met up. He had fresh wounds and bloody bandages but was very quickly patched up by the druid so not many people thought much of it. He also had a large war horse he was riding, as well as a broken sword and all my character would say is that his name is "Daren". the Horse was a bit of a clunky pet as most of the campaign we were traveling between airships and on boats. So inevitable the horse passes away in an airship explosion that nearly tpk'd the whole party. My character was very depressed by this, lashing out a bit and taking out his anger by excessively beating into a dragon that had come to attack us. But like before, it was mostly brushed under the rug. So finally after nearly 6 months of playing, (about once a week) we started to open up about each others pasts. where after so long of bottling it up I was able to let my character open the flood gates of the events that led up to that point. The backstory: Ophanage family gets drafted into war with a dragonborn nation, an accident occurs with a powerful dragon that kills most of his family and he is flung away into a river. when he finally comes to he returns to find one of his brothers, Daren, in bad shape inside the mouth of a dead dragon. he prys open the jaws and runs back to the camp. while hearing the feint whispers of his brother urging him along. only to when he gets back to overhear a commander say that his unit was fodder. That's when he realises his brother had been dead for a long time. So unable to handle the pain he blocks it away, steals a war horse and emotionally ties his feelings of lost to the horse by naming it Daren to cope. When I reveal the name of my brother was Daren I could tell people were confused, but when I got closer to the end of the story people were actually crying. (myself included) As my character was generally light hearted, friendly, and always had others back. I actually still have friends apologise for ignoring HIS feelings when the horse was shown to be dead and the party brushed it off. so TL;DR: If you want a secret backstory just let it come out naturally, and don't tell anyone if it's not the right time, If I had said "that horse was my brother!" or something I would have sounded really weird! but actually, who knows, it might have been funny.
A player instantly leaving because a Mission fails on the last inch because of a story like this, it getting posted and getting called out on being rude? Sounds very realistic even if the ruleslawyer never ruined a mission befor. I can see one out of 7 ppl reacting that way. Especially because showing a vote on whether or not someone is an asshole also fits well into the ruleslawyer theme. I am also a fan of honesty on the table. If I consider letting a rule slide because it's so cool right now I tend to say "You got so far and this idea is so cool, I want to let it slide" and it's a 5sec to 3min conversation and that's usually it.
one of my players characters has no memory of anything before 2 days before the first adventure started so i straight up asked him if i could write a secret backstory for his character and he found it a great idea:)
I’m waiting for leaks in my backstory. I’ll be honest, I tend to play characters that are rather straightforward about who they are, though they may not reveal all they know at once or all they are connected to. If confronted, they will often be open about it, not necessarily evasive. But that depends on if the others know to even ask the questions. And I always hide other tidbits of information. Having one huge secret is meh. I personally hide a few minor and one or two major ones. Some of these are open ended enough that the dm can hook and tie them into other aspects of the narrative or other people’s backstories. It’s not that complex to have this much. For some examples from one character - they have a phobia of remorhaz due to watching their lover brutally killed by one and not being able to protect anyone (they were the only survivor) - their late lover was from the opposite side of the war - their late lover’s sibling blames my character for the death of their sibling and has a one sided feud with my character. My character lets them due to their own guilt - my character comes from a well off merchant family who’s dynamic with each other is all toxic, but are all located from the same home town as another player - they know their first cousin has a secret child whose other parent is from the opposite side of the war. It would not only cause a scandal in their community, it would endanger the child. This has created tension between the first cousin and my character and is why the child is hidden to the point no other family members are aware of said child. - my character is absolutely terrified of their grandmother, the family matriarch (think mix of white diamond from Steven universe and the grandmother from Encanto and you got an idea why). - and my character is possibly a chosen of the storm/warrior god and has a mysterious sword (lightning damage and such powers) and the distinctive scars one gets from being struck by lightning. All of this can be revealed. As I said, my character shares a home town with another player character and so they already picked up on the family name and it’s association. The eventual return to said town will likely lead to more revealed there. For the lover, well that’s easy. The feud going on will maybe reveal it or the phobia being triggered, even possibly a similar enough situation will bring enough of a reaction that my character could reveal why. The child could also be revealed from a confrontation with the family or coming across the other parent. Could also be revealed by the party going to the town where the child is being hidden and raised. Same with revealing the relationship between my character and the matriarch, just a simple return to the home town. And lastly, the reveal of my character’s connection to that god. The scars already hint at it as does the sword. My character will also reveal that they personally worship said god and basically all the clues that point at it will be in the open though one will have to ask. And maybe this isn’t relevant, but it’s an ongoing joke that my character is secretly a spy. My character is actually a combat strong researcher actually, one who’s studies focus on linguistics. They often travel for that reason, are insightful, social and friendly, have friends in lots of places for this reason, have excellent calligraphy skills, excellent art skills (that they use to record things with accurately as possible), and are experienced enough that they could forge some very official looking documents. They also have ties to a faction that is basically a worldwide organization focused on gather, preserving, and protecting information. Basically a bunch of librarians. My character is also, as mentioned, combat strong which means they are sent into more dangerous places to conduct the research there and send reports back. So you can see why my character is joked about being a spy by the rest of the party. I basically told them “if they are a spy then they didn’t realize they were trained to be one or who they would be one for.” And that’s true. The home town is in a country that isn’t involved in the war between the other two neighboring ones, my character stepped away from their family to try and thrive away from the toxicity, and neither side of the war can lay claim to my character as they are a free agent of their faction, a neutral party, and who doesn’t even bother controlling my character’s movements and whims. Basically the only council my character keeps is their own. So a spy? Probably not. That requires them to have someone they consistently report movements to and obeys commands of. The faction sorta could claim this? But also can’t. Like I said, their dynamic with their faction is that they are freely able to do as they please. My character sending back their research is more courtesy on their part and the factions missions are always suggestions, not orders. To be honest, the faction more thinks of my character as one of the knowledge things they research, due to that god connection, than a fellow researcher, though their skills there are appreciated. Anyway so yeah, secrets get revealed. Gotta be prepared for them to be, always.
Regarding the AITA story: The DM didn't realize the wizard was out of spell slots? Simple solution: ASK! Example... DM: "Hey, wizard, how's your spell slots holding up?" Wizard: "I'm out..." *worried look* DM: "Okay." *skips the Hold Person and does something else* Also, regarding the last story: 🎶I've got a lovely bunch of coconuts... here they come a'flying at your head...🎶🤣
To the AITA post, I don't think he was wrong for mentioning it. DnD has a lot of rules, even the best DM on the planet is still going to forget something. In this case the DM didn't forget and was going to let it slide, which is totally within his rights. The books don't run your game you do. He's acting like OP saying it out loud means that he has to do it now. If that's the way he wants to run it that's fine, but it's not OP's fault.
The Next 100 Pledges of $5 or higher will receive a free DeeDee Keychain! PLEDGE TODAY ► www.patreon.com/oneshotquesters
Where you get bulbasaur from
For the AITA post. That was SUCH a minor reminder about rules. Also, there is no “failure” in D&D. Like sure, the party failed there objective but that just means their next quest is breaking their teammate out of jail. They didn’t lose, the goalpost just got moved.
100% this, this just gives the GM a chance to make a new dungeon with treasure and xp for the party.
Imma use that goalpost analogy, that was great.
Yep. if the GM wasn't ready for it breaking the Fly, he should not have cast it. I don't care if he's expecting it to be countered. He put it in the game world. It's not the player being the asshole to make sure the game is run properly.
Also, if I'm correct in assuming the situation based on how OP described it, dude was probably hauling ass in the air at about 40 mph, 80 if he was dashing, so there was plenty of room to rule of cool it with that kind if forward momentum
I agree that's a really good way to go about it. I'm using that logic from now on.
For the AITA: I’m the person at my table who reminds people when they have advantage or disadvantage (because somehow they just forget), how spells work when it’s asked, etc. when it’s in their favor, when it isn’t. When it’s in my favor, and when it isn’t. My friends kinda see me as a living encyclopedia rather than a rules lawyer, and I try to ask the gm with rules questions what he wants to do because ultimately he has final say. This prevents the assholish nature of rules corrections because it still leaves the power up to the dm, but since the dm is kinda newer to 5e and I’ve been playing for 6 years, sometimes he doesn’t know how stuff workes RAW so I tell him “this is what it says, this is what is theoretically allowed, but if you like a different interpretation then we go with that” or something along those lines. I don’t think this guy is the asshole because I don’t think I’m an asshole. I just think he may need to learn what I had to, and play with a group that doesn’t mind knowing what the rules are
I am much the same. If the GM says Hold Person would only render me immobile I remind them that it gives the Paralyzed/Incapacitated condition, which means I do lose the spell. Whenever I play any class I always have tabs up to conditions, effects, abilities, spells, etc so there are never any questions as to how things work.
On the flipside, I am very okay if my GM says that for this instance, they want it to work a specific way. If they're the GM, they can make that change.
Yeah for some reason the d&d community has forgotten what the term rules lawyer means. It used to refer to a person with encyclopedic knowledge of the rules when it benefited them, who conveniently forgot them whenever it would harm them.
Knowing and reminding others of the rules isn't bad. And if you want to break/bend the rules just say so.
he is the asshole cause he reminds the teacher of homework
i got this DnD DM who dislikes when i remind them (according to him is immersion) but he also makes it funny that its ONLY in combat where is an issue 😂
I hereby propose that ones like you shall be called rule jurors. For as you remind about the rules, your DM remain the final judge.
Just the very opening with the "Father help!" caught me off guard and I had to go back to make sure I heard it right. Love it, love asdf.
...I don't want to admit how many times I actually replayed that split-second opening. :-p
Also, I don't think OP is the asshole. Just the whole situatio went downhill quickly. I agree with Duke when he said that the DM should've just said "I'll let it slide" to the table instead of keeping it to himself.
Yeah. I think I’d add some absolute drama preserving handicap like “Your concentration ends but you begin to will yourself to keep the ranger afloat long enough to get them out” and let the dice decide how far astray they end up before the spell truly ends.
Is it DM fudging to ensure the original outcome that they intended? Yeah. And I think the table would have picked up on it. But it’s a nice way to keep the intended outcome, saving this embarrassment, and might allow for some interesting emergent stories (e.g. ranger ends up a little out of the way and everyone has to launch a small rescue operation to get them back.
When DMing in my games, I have a solution to this. In my games, Hold Person doesn't break concentration. It never made sense to me that it should. It doesn't effect you mental state. Your mind still works, thus you can still concentrate
@@asumax8 It says under 'Paralyzed' that the creature is 'Incapacitated.' Incapacitation is effectively KO'd without the need to be at 0 HP. You're unconscious, so you cannot concentrate. When Hold Person is removed, your paralysis is removed and you are no longer incapacitated.
And if you look up the rule for Concentration, it does say Concentration is automatically broken when Incapacitated.
@@THEGRUMPTRUCK I know it says that, thats why I say we run in differently. Especially since most people roleplay being under the effects of Hold Person/paralyzed as still being conscious. Also incapacitated does not mean you are unconscious. It says you cannot take actions or reactions. When you aee paralyzed you are incapacitated. When unconscious you are incapacitated, but when incapacitated, you are not necessarily unconscious.
On the first story: the whole "Secret Background" can be fun, but it has to be seeded. I openly discuss my backstory with other players at the table, but we also maintain the separation to character knowledge. Another player had secret royal lineage as part of his backstory, and by the time it was fully revealed, we had plenty of moments of "wait, WTF was that? Why are you acting like that?"
For her, I'd think it'd be far more fun to be almost obvious about it, just playing THE shadiest MFer, but brush off any questions or accusations. We all know the character type, where people know to just not ask too many questions. Make the final reveal be more about confirming EXACTLY which mafia this character is in, not THAT they're in the mafia.
oh i'm playing a character pretty much exactly like that in one campaign. gnome rogue with his backstory being that he got kicked out of the thieves' guild of westgate and now they want him dead. he's shady af but never actually confirmed anything, even though he's been referred to as thief by a guard (was just some questions, though, bigger problems) and he had a scene where he went off on his own to pick some pockets and is often coming up with various schemes and conspiracies.
I just think too many people got into DnD by way of the Mighty Nein (Critical Role Campaign 2), and bought into this idea that your secrets are a big part of campaigns and everyone is super into RP. Everyone needs a big shocking reveal. And that just isn't true for 95% of tables.
@@hoid9407 I guess it didn't HELP the situation, but I had plenty of cases of this decades before M9 ever existed. They do it because it was a pre-existing trope in both fiction and rpg spaces. Lots of players like being super special. Even the non-RP types might dig into it to justify all their wacky powers.
It's just one of those things that doesn't always play at a TABLE as well. Partly because in a story, you as the writer can move the unknowing characters to tease and taunt this idea. You can have scenes with just the secret haver revealing SOMETHING is up, even if not the full reveal.
And if you've got a solid table, that is EXACTLY what you should do. Let the PLAYERS have the juicy bits even if their characters don't know. Have public scenes with the GM that hint at the details and let them go full Pepe Silvia on it. Or just flat out tell them as player knowledge to maximize incidents as a light form of meta-gaming.
I had a character that was a changeling rogue who was adopted by a ship captain and took on the identity of his daughter who had died, so she had been living as this young woman full time for several years until she was found out by her adoptive father's crew and attacked, he got killed, she was thrown overboard and left for dead, and her backstory was she wanted to get revenge and her adoptive father's ship back, which she was open about, but understandably hid her being a changeling, so I was obviously not using human racial stats and not trying to exactly hide it but dropping hints (mentioning I have darkvision or can't be put to sleep, mentioning my abnormally high CHA modifier for a rogue, etc) and I had previously agreed with the DM that if my character gets knocked unconscious, she would revert back to her natural form when she took her first death saving throw, so the DM could sort of decide if the reveal was taking too long and target my character in combat to have the truth come out "naturally".
I would have been pissed if my party had been spoiled by a nosy metagamer too, especially if the DM apologized with the 😢 emojii, but I wouldn't have left the group over it, I thinks that's just an overreaction
yeah keeping it secret from the PLAYERS... that is a nono for me. Cuz if the idea that your character is actually big bad evil's henchman.. if that just comes out of nowhere... why!?
I've had more than one game die out cuz someone wanted to have big-secret 'so cool' backstory thing, and it either got leaked or it was some stupid backstabby stuff, etc.
About the AITA post: I have this strong feeling that the DM in that game is lying about having been aware of the interaction and just making all of that up after the fact to save face. As said in the video, the DM could have just let it slide if that was his intention from the start.
I have a secret back story but it is because me as a player and character doesn’t know and the dm is revealing it to me through the campaign and it’s really cool
oh that's so much fun. had a character like that, who even had a bit of amnesia about it. there were occasional hints, like feeling like he knew someone's face or seeing his face on a wanted poster. the reveal was awesome, when the whole memory came back and then having to deal with the consequences.
@@Spooglecraft it’s exactly like that just it comes in small pieces
“In my defense, if we had to cheat to win, it feels like an undeserved success.”
That… pretty much sums up the reason why I tend to rules lawyer or Dm closely to the rules. Now rule of cool still applies and if the dm says otherwise so be it of course, always check with DM and let them decide. Also I feel like it’s fair play if a person doesn’t know how a rule works, give them a chance to redo what they were gonna do. Letting them do something and going, “well you already did it even though you didn’t know,” always feels shallow to me.
Though I will admit it was a very… surreal experience during combat, another player was trying to do something but didn’t remember how it worked, and neither did the dm. I just hear them call my name while I was planning my next turn and the dm asked, “hey so how does this work?” So apparently I’m the group’s rule and spell codex.
Being the rules attorney is a great honor and privilege 📚
Being asked to stop correcting about rules, and being called upon to explain a rule in the same session is a surreal experience I've had once or twice.
For the rules lawyering. If the DM wanted you to succeed, he could have said the ranger lands between the party and the guards, allowing the party to grab him and the relic.
I mean, also hold person doesn’t break concentration
@jlaw131985 Not specifically in the spell no, but it gives you the "paralyzed" condition, which counts as being "incapacitated," and you can not concentrate on spells while Incapacitated.
@@gotelc yeah, I went and checked. They really should note that on the incapacitated condition also. I know they don’t like replicating things, but it’s honestly just much easier. I think everyone I know misses that effect.
NTA, and In defence of Rules Lawyers:
1) I am the Rules Lawyer/Note Taker of my group. I also DM. From a DM's perspective, having a player help keep track of things is great to have, and I'm pretty good at memorization but no way I have every rule memorized. Having someone to help fact check is great.
2) As a writer, verisimilitude is important, and maintaining consistency with rules helps keep the world consistent. So if it's not done to the level of constant nagging, I feel that having a Rules Lawyer can be helpful in that way.
3) I completely empathize with the "feels like cheating" sentiment. The satisfaction of winning a game, especially ones that involve planning/strategizing, comes from fairness on a level playing field, so that it feels like you earned the win. It would be no fun to win a game of chess where you only had to put your opponent in check once, but they still had to checkmate you normally.
Absolutely. Also, as soon as you let your players know you’re super fudging stuff, they stop trusting you, or the intense moments feel cheaper. Consistency and honesty is importan
I support your points, but I think you misjudge yourself. I think that you are not a Rules Lawyer, but are instead (like myself) a Rules Public Defender.
The difference is the former uses the rules as a way to only benefit themselves, while the latter brings up rules for the sake of fairness, consistency, and the benefit of the group.
I agree with this. I've called the person that helps rules even if it bites them in the ass the rules attorney as it's not being used maliciously or for benefit. Just to be helpful.
I would also have Siad the same thing if the dm had forgot. I dislike the idea of being given a "gimme"
The plan had risks and if it didn't then what was the point of it. The real feeling of success is how ya handle the curve balls
@@RayneGrimm1 Rules Public Defender or Rules Defense Attorney, either sounds good. The former deals with criminal trials, while the later civil. Lol.
I'm very big on roleplay and would also be upset if my backstory "secrets" were metagamed.
"Throw us at a wall!"
"Don't throw us at a wall."
Instructions unclear. Threw wall at OneShotQuesters
To the rules lawyer, as a DM myself one work around I may have tried is that “sure the spell ends, but the wizard is able to use residual magic to turn it into a sort of glide, rather than just drop” but even then, there’s a lot of different ways this could have played out, it’s not wrong (unless someone’s being a jerk about being a rules lawyer) to point out when a “rule” is broken
But also Hold Person doesn’t end concentration
@@jlaw131985 yes it does. It gives you the paralyzed condition, which gives you the incapacitated condition, which ends concentration. Fly is a concentration spell.
@@Lycaon1765 incapacitated only makes you unable to take actions or reactions, maintaining concentration does not require an action of any kind.
@@TheNightVeil Rather then looking at the incapacitated condition, look at the Concentration break down. According to Concentration, and I quote "You lose concentration on a spell if you are incapacitated or if you die."
It is a bit confusing since Incapacitation doesn't mentioned Concentration, but Concentration does list Incapacitation as something that breaks it.
Hope this helps.
@@Archaesinthewrongroom yeah, they really should list it on the condition, it would even take minimal replication which they hate. Everyone I know messed this up and I went and checked afterwards.
Arguably the "rules lawyer" could find a DM more in line with their values, but as a DM, I agree with Duke that the main fault for this situation was actually the DM. The DM could have made the call in the moment and had more respectful communication afterward (though it's true that the player could have communicated afterward better too, rather than just showing the post), but also, a DM shouldn't be so adverse to the party failing - it will happen. And getting a member captured doesn't really sound that bad - that actually sounds like an exciting situation to try to get out of it next time.
One thing I've learned over many years of being a DM: let stuff happen. In this situation, the intent of the DM might have been to let them succeed, but the unexpected failure can lead to just as, if not more, interesting stories. Now the party has to plan a jailbreak! Never get so caught up in what you planned as a DM that you adjust how things work with mechanics or fudge dice rolls. A ton of the fun of D&D is the chaos and unexpected turns the story can take.
For the AITA post, if the DM was going to let it slide, they should have still let it slide and come up with an in story reason why in this case, concentration was not broken. The DM can also say that the group got lucky in this case implying that concentration would normally be broken in the future. Every D&D game is a homebrew to some extent and the Rule of Cool can always trump the rules if the DM calls it that way.
First story: Keep secrets from characters, not players.
It is very frustrating how the DM messed that up. I'm not familiar with the tools he used, but either this information should have been listed on a private page, or not have been on the wiki at all.
I'm also annoyed at how the player handled that. I have stumbled over campaign spoilers before, by reading something about a module's npc by accident. Kept my mouth shut over it ever since. It's not that hard.
That said, as Duke and Wife explained, secrets limit you in your roleplay, and the Big Reveal will likely never happen as you want it. Instead, it would have been great to at least drop some hints to the other players at the start. Like, 'my character is a member of a secret guild'. Imagine your character sneaking off in the evening, to meet up with a contact from that guild. Let the other players get a taste of the secret, while their characters are utterly oblivious.
But remember: No plan survives contact with the players. That goes for DMs as much as for other players. Metagaming aside, if you act shifty, players will try to figure out why, and try to guess your secret long before you feel ready to reveal it.
This situation should hopefully not ruin DnD for you. This group may not be the best for you, but next time you play, consider playing a character that isn't built around keeping big secrets.
This. Yeah it sucks that the players found out, but that doesn't have to ruin the reveal in game. In fact, it might help because the others got a chance to prepare their character reaction. At the end of the day, they're roleplaying too. It's awesome if you can catch the player out with a surprise, but generally makes the in game moment less involved. They're busy rethinking what they know for valid reasons.
Badly handled by the DM and other player? For sure, but this shouldn't be the big issue. I could get being mad at someone metagaming, given it's been a topic before, but not because the secret is out in real life.
Best way that big reveal would happen is if there's possibly a secret-traitor that the players know might be any of the players, but no one are aware which, even the traitor until 'that moment', and whomever is the traitor gets a new character the moment it happens. Works well for one-shots and whatnot.
I like how they're talking in the first bit about how players will hold onto their backstory secrets and then not get involved in the game because I see that a lot. It takes someone very good at like improv and redirection to still be engaged with the other players, while still holding onto these massive secrets if it's done well, it could be incredible but the trick is learning to do it. Well redirection is such a good friend for these things like you could still engage with the other players well redirecting away from topics that your character doesn't wanna talk about the same way you would in person
You did Bulbasaur, you did Squirtle, now you need to do Charmander.
The first person is making mountains from molehills. The concept of “dramatic irony” is fun!
Fun story:
First time DM and doing LMoP campaign.
I Put my players in the feywild after being ambushed at their camp in the woods by a group of faerie dragons at a fey crossing. They got knocked out and awoke in "a strange and vibrant world that they've never seen before. Merely breathing the air seems to be pleasurable". They proceeded to wander around in the feywild and investigate the area, finding strange and mysterious local flora and fauna. Vibrant biting flowers, talking trees, etc. They eventually came to a door that had strange images carved on the surface in a cross pattern. Each image was in a section, and portrayed somebody doing an iconic dance move. Namely, the chicken dance, the disco, the twerk, and the cotton eye joe. Next to the door was a carcass. They inspected the carcass and a little tooth faerie sputtered out. They attacked it, and it gave off a screeching cry in its death throws, causing a swarm of them to respond in the distance. I let my players know that a large buzzing sound could be heard off in the distance and sounded as if it were getting closer. I had in my mind 10 rounds of game play time before they would arrive, with them being able to be seen as an amorphous black cloud in the sky when there were 6 turns left. The players finally decided to inspect the door more enthusiastically knowing something was amiss. They kept saying their characters would mimic the image, causing the icon to faintly glow but fade immediately after. It was only when they asked for my npc, a doppelganger still in disguise for a grand reveal later, to do the dance, that the icon stayed lit for a round before fading. It took them two rounds of watching me physically do the cotton eye joe dance did they finally piece it together. The look of horror when they realized they had to do the chicken dance and twerk among other things was totally worth it. They narrowly escaped being devoured alive by tooth fairies, like that scene in Hellboy 2. After they closed the door behind them, they found themselves inside a cavern labyrinth posing riddle questions with a devious leprechaun as a guide. When the riddle would be answered a door would open on either the left or right side. If wrong, they were met with a combat encounter, if right they were rewarded with a small prize such as a healing potion. The dungeon ended with a word search kind of test. The floor was tile, and each had a letter. They had to walk on the proper letters to get to the other side of a trap would trigger for each incorrect tile. The riddle read: Before the flame, must come the spark, before anything is done, you'll need this before you start. The answer was Motivation. It was a fun filler session as we were missing half our group at the time. Just wish everybody got to enjoy it. Hope somebody reads this and decides to try it for themselves 😊
About that second story, I was in a campaign once where my character was the only one who could understand the Kenku Cleric. (This was pre-mordenkainens, so we still went with the rule that they had to basically speak only in mimicry and communicate in other ways.) My Barbarian was the only one who could understand because he communicated through interpretive dance and every single time people rolled Insights to understand him, I never rolled lower than an 18, despite most of my other rolls for anything else being relatively average.
I guess the gods just wanted me to be able to understand and relay his intent to the party.
We had, for a high level homebrew campaign, two fey of opposing courts (my unseelie warlock and the seelie pixie sorc), and a succubus bard that was made for the meme and pretended to be a human.
The issue with the succubus, was that my character had that one invocation that effectively gives truesight, and promptly had to pull our "regular woman" aside to go "Hey I get it if you're trying to hide this, but I CAN see you. Can we use this for a prank or something?"
Eventually the DM did work in our backstories and we found out the Warlock and Sorc were both related to the same person (Sorc's sister married Warlock's brother) and it became a neat little side quest, but the one "big secret" character got IMMEDIATELY outed due to one invocation, and we all rolled with it since we enjoyed the rp each thing brought out. The differences being that it wasn't metagaming, and we all knew eachother beforehand and had been playing together for the better part of a decade (mostly, sorc was new but he fits right in)
Baulder's Gate 3 would've canceled concentration when he got paralyzed, so I see no problem with it.
For the big secret post: In my opinion, holding onto secrets is much more for the person holding them than the people receiving them, if that makes sense. For me, I'm a HUGE role-player who makes creative backstories for my characters, whether the DM uses them or not. And as a DM I absolutely connect players' backstories to the plot - it's a great way to immerse people in the game. However, the "big reveals" don't always happen like they do on streamed/recorded DND sessions (Critical Role, Dimension 20, etc.) where everyone's freaking out. And that's what people forget sometimes.
For the AITA post: NTA. The party can't win all the time. There wouldn't be much of an interesting plotline if they just succeeded with everything they tried to do. However, rules lawyers also need to be careful with how much they bring up rules - especially if they're not the DM. Sometimes the DM will rule something that's different than what players expect. I did that in one of my campaigns and had one of my players message me after the session, quite upset and wanting to argue my logistics call (the result of which didn't really change much in the long-term game) because they had proof I did it wrong. It zapped my confidence as a DM and took the fun out of planning for the campaign. Communication between DM and players on how rules will be run (and honestly communication in general) is so important and can really make or break a game.
Omg the "father help!” At the beginning killed me😂😂
The fruit story is the biggest "sure that happened" thing I've heard in a long time
For the AITA post, when the OP was being the rules lawyer he wasn't being an A, but when he messaged the group with the post he was.
For the pantomiming DM, good job! Always need to keep the plot able to move forward, while allowing the players to fail in fun ways!
The AITA as a DM I often prefer being reminded, but sometimes it is worth bending.
As someone who does rules lawyer a bit, it's important to always either leave DM veto on the table "paralyzed usually breaks concentration, unless there is a DM veto" and/or perhaps ask it as a question "doesn't being paralyzed break concentration?".
Just, always try to allow the DM or whoever an out if they need it
I am the kind of person who checks things like this, if I dont know them, behind the scenes and then, instead of outright revealing it, asks whether we're supposed to accept this as homebrew or if they made a mistake.
That way, I try to let a lot of things just fly, while also getting a definitive answer about whether is is going to keep happening in the future.
And even then our DM sometimes goes "Nah you're right" and retcons the last 10 Minutes of play to replay the situation with the correct rules.
Edit:
The Problem with not saying anything, is that it creates problems in the future, when you want to apply the same logic to enemies, and it then works differently.
If the group encounters a flying enemy in the future, they wouldnt even try hold person, because they'd assume it works the same as when the enemies tried it on them.
AITA post:
OP spouts rule
DM me: Wizard, how important is concentrating on fly to your character right now?
Wizard: Extremely. The rangers life is on the line.
Me: Enough to down yourself?
Wizard: yes
Dm: as the ranger lands on the ground, the Wizard falls to 0hp.
I do what AITA OP did nearly every session. Sometimes it annoys others, sometimes it's useful. I'm not as concerned about if we win or lose as making sure the outcome was earned. If we win, I'll celebrate, but I'd take an honest loss over a cheated victory any day.
If the DM acknowledges it and overrules anyway, I drop it immediately. When things typically get the most heated are either when I've lost focus and forgotten a house rule again, or when others at the table insist that their house rule is what the book says.
Story 1: Weather the secret is a major character element or a minor one, I tend to focus on how they would either avoid or shift the focus away from the subject. I find that if you address it in common broad strokes (like quipping about how stingy your mom was, or how strict your dad was), or shift the focus of your character's surface motivations to the present task, then you can leave others feeling like you're not hiding things at all
also player knowledge is not character knowledge. and the DM is free to go 'no your character would not do that cuz they are not aware of this, just because you are'... and it works the same way around. Just cuz you as a player missed a detail or forgot 'oh right, concentration on this spell will break if my character does this' and thusly not punishing the character for something the player forgot... LET THEM ROLL, the character has STATS, they are NOT the player after all.
@@kinagrill well said.
Paused after you read the AITA post. As someone who has trouble with my rules lawyer tendencies myself, I agree with OP in that the whole thing would've felt like an undeserved success if I had just let it slide. Would've done the same thing and not regretted it.
Hell, in my game, my chars backstory is that his prior group was wiped out. Imagine my SHOCK when the DM made it so that one member of my group basically sold us out and is now working for the cult who killed my former group and is now making my new group's life....difficult. Well damn, good on my DM!
Cool DM
@@Thurmanation2011s Yeah, definetely tossing us some curveballs.
I am lucky in that I tend to find groups that are heavily invested in backstory.
For the AITA post: I don't think he was in the campaign. However, he 100% is for sharing his post with his group. Kind of a "I told you I was right" moment. Should have definitely approached it all differently
This is why I have an insane luck roll. I DM a very very homebrew DND adventure for the older two kids I watch (12 and 9) they have so much fun creating their characters and enjoy solving puzzles more than the actual combat. But because I'm new to the game myself, I mess up sometimes. Or one of the kids rolls impossibly bad over and over again. And, they're just kids. So I had them find a lucky rock. Whoever has it can use it for a luck roll after everything else has failed. It has unknown consequences. One time they planned to use a cave in to kill a monster and I warned them that they were still in the cave too. One boy was worried, the other was already casting fireball. They got caved in but weren't squished. I figured they'd move the rock after a few tries and it'd be fine.
I WAS WRONG. Strength checks failed. Wisdom checks failed. I even did a dex check because, like, maybe they wiggled their way out?? But no. So they used their lucky rock. Finally, finally there was a good roll. A mouse on the mountain in top of the cave kicked a little rock which hit a bigger rock ECT, till the boulders in front of the cave cleared. They're free, but I warn them that there will eventually be a price to pay for such unnatural luck, and that the more they use it, the higher that price will be.
My best reveal moment of my character never was the one who was obvious that I try to hide but de subtle one that hide behind it. One of my Character was a Drow disguise at a Hight elf Woman when they discover he was a Drow it wasn't a big deal but the surprise but when they discover he was a Man their surprise face was perfect.
I think for the big secret ruined story, if your backstory gets accidentally revealed like that then find a way to bring what happened irl into the rp. What if not just the person was digging around irl but his character also was doing some "digging" offscreen basically and he found out this fact and then you take that as a way to make the big reveal like he calls out your character next session and your character is on the spot having to come clean. Sounds like something to work with the DM and the 2 players and you can craft it into a cool reveal that way.
For the AITA post. Would have ruled it as "Okay, flying stops due to paralysis of the wizard as they cannot hold concentration, assuming he is still falling 50 ft with a momentum of moving forward 60 ft per 6 seconds, and within a round a player would fall 200 ft per round as per the rules, let us assume he drops to about 30 ft forward."
People obsessed with rules are the worst. One time I created a warlock who sold her voice for magical powers, creating a little mermaid story... And my DM told me "Fu, most spells require incantations". I came up with multiple solutions - Morse alphabet, making noises with something else than her mouth, or even just decide what specific part of her body was changend [vocal cords, lips, tongue] and with that she would still be able to make noises with her mouth, just couldn't talk to others. Later I thought about other stuff [that I don't remember rn] and my DM still said no, because "rules say incantations!". Total creativity killer.
In a game I play, every once in a while, one of our characters will get controlled by a bad guy. And we have a rule where we are to attack the closest person or cause the most amount of damage if we are to attack PCs this way. My artificer had gotten controlled for a round and even though there was someone about 10-15ft, I had shatter and my highest spell slot. There was three other PCs in shatter range so I cast shatter at the three players. We were cracking up laughing at it.
This has also happened to me in the campaign. So no hard feelings.
me: "my character will have a great backstory he won't share with anyone until it comes up!"
also me: *in character trauma dumps onto the rest of the party by session 3* 😂
edit: for the AITA post: i fully agree with OP, he did the right thing, DnD is not just a story telling medium it is also a game and only winning because you cheated or someone cheated on your behalf feels cheap, I'd rather mess up and having to find a way out of the situation than just succeed because a DM deliberately forgot a rule, i don't think there's anything wrong with bringing up rules that might be to the detriment of your party, it bothers me way more when people only conveniently remember the rules when it is in their favor
I actually did that one, pointing out a forgotten rule and felt really bad about it and just asked... so uh.. about this rule? should I just... not mention it further... or?
And the DM was actually just happy I'd made mention of it and incorporated a reason as to why the rule was not applicable (I sadly do not recall the specifics), and I was happy. There was a reason beyond 'cuz DM said so' and that was all I really needed.
I played in a campaign where there was a sect of changelings that were essentially the illuminati. I played a changeling cleric who defected and was on the run, and obviously didn't want anyone to know he was a changeling because eyes are everywhere and one slip up can mean that he's found.
In session 0 i mentioned that i was playing a changeling, but when we had session 1 the next week, it was obvious that no one remembered that he was a changeling.
It turned into a fun game for the DM and I to see who could figure it out. Even going so far as to make a new rule that when unconscious (death saves, specifically) my character would drop his appearance and appear in his natural form.
3 fights i go into death saves in 6 months of the campaign, and everyone failed a perception check to see that the human cleric was not in fact human.
I ended up doing a big reveal to the party after those 6 months and it was pandemonium. Probably the best way a secret backstory could have played out, despite trying to make it obvious from day 1.
“This time, a pineapple” is a sentence I never thought could be menacing before today 😆
~_~
Ananas. It's neither pine related nor close to an apple.
Reminding the paralyzed failure thing I would have done the same thing because everyone forgets even the DM and and the DM can say"im waving this for dramatic reasons" or something because everyone forget things all the time and you are trying to play a game. I've done the same thing and forgetting the mechanic and remembering later makes you feel so much worse.
I'm kinda a rules lawyer player, I try to tone it down but there are times I double check cause as much as I want to see something succeed I want to make sure it's "realistic." I admit I don't know everything, my knowledge is generally in player character skills, spells, and game mechanics. When it comes to monsters or homebrew I can only begin to guess what's about to happen.
The big thing I've learned is that if the dm allows something that normally doesn't work make it clear if it's a one time thing or if it's consistent. And if the group isn't sure or can't remember how something works as written I look it up and explain it, but I leave the dm to make the final call in case they want to change it.
I don't know if anyone was at fault during the AITA, sometimes you just get excited about remembering something and don't realize the consequences of rules lawyering at the moment. I would say that if it's a repeated problem talk to the player on the side and remind them that while the rules are important, the DM is the arbitrator of the rules and can decide when certain aspects of rules impede the narrative being told and allow them to bend.
If I were the DM, I would have given the Ranger a moment when they feel themselves falling where they could try to do something before the consequences of landing in front of a certain capture occurred, like throwing the relic or perhaps casting Featherfall. I wouldn't explicitly say "I'm bending the rules in your favor by not breaking concentration", I would play off as if that was information I had forgotten about the spell. Handwaving like you're recommending would make it feel like the DM is trying to push the narrative a certain way, rather than letting player choices dictate the outcomes.
I go back to my saying of "Tools, not Chains". The rules are there as a set of tools to help shape the way a story goes. They are not there to be the ultimate arbitrator of every action, chaining us to the rulebooks. You will never find the rule for "I want to aim for cutting the Titan's hand off so he can't snap and destroy half the universe", the DM has to come up with a rule on the spot for if it's a higher AC attack to aim, a separate DEX check to aim, a damage threshold to remove use of the arm, or an athletics check to cut through the muscle and bone.
There is a HUGE difference between "OH SHIT that will break your concentration!" in a chocked way while it is happening and just stating facts in order to just be a smartass.
Funny story about a backstory reveal: One of my players(Rogue) has a character who got into a really bad fight with an NPC which left both with scars. Rogue's scar was revealed and the party was told about the battle was received. A few sessions later, they're going to cross paths with NPC again.
Rogue: Whelp, time to confront my brother, NPC
Party: Your what?!
Rogue: Yeah...Did I not mention that part?
Party: Yes! Full details
And that's how the rogue's full backstory got told to the party
On the don't reveal backstory post. I am in a champaign that has a character who even he doesn't know his full backstory. I know some parts, but my DM has helped me by adding some flair to it.
I'm in my first TTRPG (DnD) campaign ever, and my character also had a secret concerning their identity. I felt it'd be nice for the players to interact naturally not knowing about my backstory, so I kept it a secret for over a year. I was fine with telling them if they'd pushed for it or it was logical in the story and just RP-ed keeping that in mind. Once we got to the point where I had to confide in them who my PC really was, the other players were al very happy I did it this way, so they could more easily feel what their characters felt. And how they could think back to my PCs interactions and how it makes sense given who/what I really was.
So, IMHO, I think it's fine to have a PC with a secret, but it should more define how you RP and what your character's reasoning/actions would be, than be something you want to hold on to for that one moment.
I had ideas on how my secret could be found out by the other PCs and it went in a COMPLETELY different direction, but I just ran with it, and everything turned out to feel very natural and logical given the circumstances. (My PC turned Cleric of Tymora and I even in some sessions flipped a coin (three times total over a few session) to ask Tymora if I should just tell them, but got three "no"-s which made for pretty fun RP-ing)
I had something like this, were my character didn't actually know his backstory and the only people that knew were me and the DM
For the AITA post i would've also 100% done the same thing. It would've been dishonest to NOT point out the rules interaction. And you shouldn't want to have to play dishonestly. It is part of the unspoken agreement of the game that you will point out these interactions even if they're bad for you and the DM will do the same (like reminding you that you forgot hunter's mark on the BBEG even though that would help take it down in one shot or something. Or that this rule technicality benefits you in some way).
That's why am a bit of a "rules lawyer". Because i want to be honest with the rest of the table and help them remember the rules. They're my friends. It would be rude to do so otherwise.
In his defense, letting them cheat to win means not playing out the loss.
That’s great for hero fantasy but not very gritty.
For the first story, my immediate thought was that the reason the player was upset that the other players knew their secret back story is because they were going to betray the group in some way & now that they know, it'll be harder. I could be wrong & all the heist movies I've watched have warped my view.
For the AITA story, I don't think the player is in the wrong for pointing that out, in the games I've played in or run, there have been many times when players will get caught up in the combat & forget something like that. Usually, someone will point it out & whoever is running the game will ask the player if that's what they want to do or do they want to change it. Then it's up to the player to decide.
I do think OP is a bit of an assh*le for showing the others because it does seem like they did it as a way to show the group that they were right.
And I completely agree with not assuming what players are going to do. Whenever someone asks me for tips on being a DM I always tell them: When presented with options A, B, or C, players will choose option Q. I've been in these situations as a DM & I'm usually the player who picks option Q
I feel like there's more to the AITA story. As others have said, that's such a small thing. I feel like that wasn't the first incident, and it's been festering for awhile.
For the aita post, i would probably have asked my dungeon master about it and asked if we were doing book rules or the first rule in the dragon of icespire peak rules book: "whatever the dungeon master says goes."
In situations regarding rules and game mechanics, I always just ask the DM: "hey, can we do it this way?" and especially for situations where it might affect other players we have our private messenger app ready to text each other to talk such things over (even when we're playing in person and are sitting at the same table).
This prevents situations like in the AITA section. Even though in my opinion, if it was just what the guy claimed that happened, I would not be offended by that as another player. If I where in his shoes I would have formulated it as a question: "hey, doesn't rule xyz apply here or do we make an exception?" And I would have done that by silently texting the DM.
So, their Ranger didn't die he was only captured, and their initial cavalier attempt to get the relic was thwarted, but the mission is absolutely still salvageable, with a daring rescue to boot? Sounds to me like their adventure got a lot more interesting... I think their initial reaction was a little harsh, especially 'keep your mouth shut' guy. I'm all for rule of cool, the option that's more fun for everyone is better, and in this particular story, them being stopped quite dramatically, with the ranger plummeting into the enemy's clutches literally 1 turn from victory, and now they get to come up with a rescue plan, AND a way to get the relic at the same time?? Like damn that's an awesome turn for the adventure to take!
In this case that setback means there's a lot more character stuff to explore too, like getting revenge on the Inquisitor, maybe the ranger gets a nasty scar or something badass, so much storytelling potential can be created by defeats... provided they aren't TPKs that is.
For the rules one, as someone who's DM'ed a little bit, I might have the player make a saving through; Either a spell save, or a save based on their spell casting modifier (i.e. Wis., Str, Int, Chrm) so that the flyer can have a chance to keep concentration. But then as a player, if I thought of that while it was happening I wouldn't have mentioned anything.
Last story: Wow. That's nuts.
😂 I had to comment on the first story, I’m in that EXACT situation, planning to change class to paladin in a later scene with DM, other player figures it out off a COIN i nonchalantly asked him for, one “Delete this shit now” meme later and we saved my secret lol the other 3 don’t know
The secret backstory thing. I always find if the twist being spoiled ruins everything. Then it feels like u didn't have much confidence in your character on their own.
Though I can emphasize that it can suck when someone finds it out beforehand, especially by metagaming.
And the player who rules lawyered is not the asshole. Things going wrong and needing to think on the fly is when things get interesting. And now they have to break a ranger out of prison. The rest of the group needs to realize that these moments are opportunities. Also, I am also the one who hates to succeed from cheating.
With regards to the "big backstory reveal", I've actually had it happen once - the GM and I managed to keep my character's backstory a secret from both the other characters AND the players for six months, revealed it at a particularly impactful moment, and it was glorious.
That said, nowadays if I have a "secret" in my backstory, I take it as incumbent upon me, the player, to have my character "accidentally" let things slip or otherwise clue the other players in that there's something going on here. Or ask them to make insight checks to tell that my character is being deceitful. Because if no one ever finds about about the deep, dark secret, then that's withholding fun from everyone, including me.
That last story was glorious
Okay, for the AITA, since I'm the only person on planet normal, OP is TA, and here's why:
A lot of the time people forget that DND is a game. And what is the point of a game? To have fun. The DM even admitted in this situation that he purposefully ignored it. Judging by the group's response, OP singlehandedly ruined the fun they were having.
Being a rules lawyer is okay, and even helpful in some cases, but being a rules lawyer isn't an excuse to spoil the fun of the game, as that's the main priority.
I wouldn't call myself a defender of the rules, but I often get sidetracked when they perceive it that way after the phrases: "does it work like that...?" or "does it work exactly...?". But I'm just clarifying because I'm not sure I remember correctly
Story 1 is very funny to me cuz i am currently in a campaign, i have a bit of a weird backstory which started when my character was sbout 12 years old, he didnt remember much, where he was, where he came from etc. He did remember his name, how to talk, and other basic thing he learned at school. Now the fun part is, I accidentally heard one of the players talk about my backstory, but i actually dont know what happened before i got struck by lightning and ended up in the forest at around 12 years old.
So one of my party members knows where my character is from and why he went to a forest, i dont tho, not in character, but funnily enough, not irl either.
AITA? Story: Honestly I feel like if the DM wanted to let it slide, they could've just let the group decide, or rollback that decision.
If the OP is constantly doing this, and is the only one doing it, then I think the frustration is fair. But I also get the OP's perspective and reasoning for at least this instance. But the post should've been kept too themselves.
I had a character with a secret. Session 1 he got knocked out. And the party realised his vitals were off. And hence started him slowly revelaing one after another he was undead. This moment of the dm describing a small detail about my undead masked character’s breath and heartrate led to it. This started in such early game. That my character got their few sessions (like 2 and a half) of being a nontalkative mysterious character before finally admitting to being undead. And then before saying it to more than one he let other characters roleplay a bit too, before finding a quiet moment to roleplay in the reveal.
With the AITA story:
My biggest issue with the dm is that he basically let the ranger fall to their doom after op mentioned the rule. I don't know if they casted the hold person spell as they were flying back down, but it definitely pictured op as the bad guy.
I would have either let the ranger do a quick dex save to catch himself on the wall or if it was casted before he flew, i would have redconned his jump off the tower and allowed him to think of something else, it would have softened the initial blow and hopefully would have kept the game going on a good note.
The AITA guy: NTA pre-edit. ESH post-edit.
The AITA is a classic spirit of the rules vs. letter of the rules debate, and totally depends on the nature of the group. The DM also could have reacted better. "Flying player, you feel the effects of the spell begin to fade, you have only seconds to react, what do you do?" And you bend the story such that the flying player has agency to move to a safer position before falling.
With the first story I think a lot of the blame lies with the DM. They knew they had a player who had a secret in their backstory, and they (presumably, unless this was the first time it happened) knew they had a player who was a meta gamer. It's not like the metagamer found out about OP's backstory via telepathy; the DM had to put something in there for the meta gamer's character to find that revealed OP's secret. If they were going to do something like that, they should have talked to the OP about it first, either to give them a heads up if it was a situation the DM felt was unavoidable, or to check in with them and make sure they were okay with it, and discuss possible legitimate reasons why their character's name wouldn't have been on that list of members.
So! I want to give a bit of advice for people who want to add secrets and reveals that are baked into their backstories, and for this I have some pieces of personal advice that I've started using for my long running campaign characters:
First, start off with information that is reasonable for the character to reveal. For example, if a character is a member of the Black Network like the one shown, they may not be forthright with that info, but they *may* be more willing to talk about their life before they joined; stuff like being orphaned at a young age, having to lie, cheat and steal to survive, and eventually finding a group of people that cared about them and helped them persevere. (which can _later_ be revealed as the Zhents) Important thing to note: don't outright lie with this info unless you KNOW your fellow players are good with RP and have enough experience with improv that they can still justify working with someone willing to lie about stuff like that.
Next, come up with the information that the character knows, but is intentionally keeping from others they don't trust. This can be anything from ties to evil organizations, to detrimental curses, to horrible actions they've taken in the past. The important thing for this stuff is that, when your character *does* trust their companions, have them start to open up by revealing these things. It doesn't need to be dramatic, just find an appropriate time to mention them. Using the story for example, while session 5 may still be a bit early for a full reveal, it sounds like the party was at a point where having an in with the Zhents would have been beneficial, so having their character go, "I think I can get us an audience with the Black Network... let's just say I know a guy," would be a good, in-character clue towards this, showing a bit of trust without fully revealing everything to these adventurers they just barely met. They could even try and disguise themselves during the audience, or use Thieves Cant during the initial meeting to ask anyone who knew them to keep quiet about their involvement durring negotiations, fun subtle things that hint towards your character's backstory and reward other players for paying attention to the game.
Finally, and this is the biggest thing I can suggest for every and all characters, be they shorter or long form campaigns: come up with some mystery that your character *doesn't* know about their past, but *_wants to._* Something that motivates your character to get involved in the adventure, and gives your DM tools to hook your character in. This not only gives _you_ something that you can use to contribute to the overall story of the game you're telling with your friends, but if it's interesting and spicy enough, it may even become focal to the overall narrative if other players learn about it and *also* want to learn about it. Once again, to pull from the above video, maybe the reason the PC is on the adventure with the party is because the Zhentarim lost contact with one of it's core members, who just so happened to be the mentor of the PC, and now she's using the party to try and follow leads involving Zhent sightings to try and find them, which the DM can use to further pull them into the conspiracy surrounding the Dragon Heist.
Now, in the Story told, the DM wanted simple backstories and... that's reasonable. However, more often than not, I find that when DMs say simple, they mean like... a couple sentences. I'm not going to lie, I'm absolutely guilty of writing pages upon pages of backstory for my characters, but bear in mind that it can be a bit unreasonable to expect a DM to read ALL of that on top of planning their campaign _as well as_ the adventures within each session. (I absolutely know from experience that having to reference page long backstories can be a *nightmare* when planning sessions with character hooks. So to further illustrate all this in practice, here's a condensed version of a few of my more fleshed out characters in three sentences, one focusing on each principal shown:
Gil: A human monk with an affinity for fire and bestial fighting style, Gil was completely self-taught and will do just about anything for wealth. This is because, before he was a human, Gil was really a gold dragon, deemed to greedy and selfish by Bahamut, and was cursed to live the life of a mortal as penance. Gil now wanders the land, searching for some way to prove himself once again worthy of his draconic form... and maybe start amassing a new hoard on the side.
Jikaal: A kobold soldier who failed to protect her homeland, Jikaal was thrust hundreds of years into the future as a chosen hero destined to fight the ones responsible for the destruction. Though she does her best to try and find peaceful resolutions, her violent upbringing and quest for vengeance has created a darkness in her that she tries her best to overcome, and sometimes fails. When she fled her home however, she took her three eggs with her, and is now desperately trying to discover what became of her children in her absence.
Turner: A young kenku adopted and raised by a high member of the Font of Knowledge, Turner took to studies in magic under the tutelage of the many librarians he met. However, his caretaker went missing after a violent break-in at his home, and all Turner found was a lead lined box with a book, and a note to keep the book from anyone who may use it for ill. Now desperate and paranoid, Turner sets his sight on joining adventurers to help track down his missing father, and maybe figure out what's so dangerous about the book... if he can trust them. (fun fact, this was actually my OWN character from Dragon Heist, and we had another character in the party who was actually a Red Wizard spy, so... yeah, we had a lot of fun skirting around trusting each-other in that game)
DM's knowingly let certain things slide all the time for the purpose of "Because it's more fun!", and since the DM has the final say on everything...if the DM says it, it's now fact in the game.
At my table we learned that players should *never* call out or nitpick these kinds of things, even as a joke, unless it benefits the party. If you do this against the party's benefit then the DM will make you specifically catch the brunt of the fallout.
On the AITA post, as a DM, I *prefer* it when my players call out a rule I missed. Just because someone is a DM, doesn't mean they know ALL the rules off the top and it is easy to miss something like a spell effect. I've had moments when I had a boss cast two concentration spells and my party is like--wait, doesn't the other spell end? and then I'm like oh shit, you are right, xyz effect is now over, great news!
Shit happens, and if a rules lawyer isn't being ANNOYING about the way they are pointing out things like this, it can be a major help. It can help the players understand the rules; and in some cases, it can help the DM understand the rules too. The trick is how the rules lawyering is presented. It sounds like OP probably does this a fair bit; which indicates that the DM probably "lets rules slide" a fair bit as well. When you have a DM like that, how are you supposed to know when they are purposefully letting a rule slide vs genuinely overlooking a rule by mistake in the heat of the moment?
The DM is likely forgetting (purposefully or otherwise) a lot of rules, which doesn't really paint the DM in a very good light, tbh. Either he's new and still learning, which he needs a player like OP--or he's ignoring a good chunk of the rules which is bad for a campaign. Either way, OP is NTA here, at all.
Until he shared the post with his group then he definitely became the asshole because he was just being petty at that point.
As a player who had a big reveal, (like a miniboss turned out to be my character's brother) it was amazing and provided a huge role play moment.
The only thing i could fault the OP on is posting it in a different publically available area.
As a DM i have a huge reveal, which my players are smart and probably figured out some of it, but I'm hesitant to post about it bc i dont want it getting back to my players and ruin that moment for them.
I had/have a character with a "secret" backstory (its all out now) but it wasnt intended to be secret per se. She was supposed to be open about it when asked but not long before my first chance, I had been told I was a "spotlight hog" by someone. I had the very unfortunate reaction of going to the extremes and withdrawing entirely, turning my casual pc into a broody one and Im STILL slowly pushing her back out of this.
Even with the players knowing your backstory you can roleplay a reveal to the characters
I'd like to play along the D&D guidlines a lot. So I'd probably also remind my DM that some spells/actions break con on other spells.
I ran a supehero game and 3 players had secret back storie and I was spending a lot of time stepping into the other room to discuss the secret parts. So I finally told my group they were all good role players and we had a session called secrets and lies everyone got 30 minutes of solo play where there secret was revealed to the player with the expectation they would not metagame with it. It was fascinating One playing was searching of the AI android his late father had created, another player was a AI android who didn't know thier past.. Independently created no collaboration. So we had a good time revealing and then creating 2 "secrets" for the players.
Sticking perfectly to the rules implies the rules are perfect, and that's not an assumption I'm making.
The ONLY unbreakable rule in D&D is the rule of Cool.
We're preparing to make a campaign. The dm is putting together the plot and how the campaign will be (since its non combat and wholesome so there isn't a lot of campaigns to compare to.)
My character is was just a regular girl in school, kinda weird, no friends, but she's very cute and naive. +2 intelligence -1 wisdom. And my boyfriend's character is a well detailed homebrew character (shark humanoids). And since (from what I've heard) vampires don't need air. So they're best friends (and eachothers only friends since he is very arrogant [in a funny goofy way] )
Her mother is a vampire and when she was 12-14 she turned her daughter into a vampire. She now lives with her dad and has her friend as she tries to become a great wizard and be smart.
The first mission is helping a spiritual hippie girl (who will become a close friend) and she will give vampire girl a spell book
As an autistic person: the second person sounds like they might be on the spectrum. Both the desire to play according to the rules ánd the showing the post to the group afterwards. The purpose of showing it is not "who is right?" the purpose is "what is the right answer?" and by having feedback from so many people, that would certainly feel like you've found an answer. I know for myself that I am invested in discussions because I want to find out what the correct answer is, I don't care about being right. In fact, if I'd be wrong, I'd genuinely find it helpful if someone told me and would thank them for telling me.
Also, how you feel about letting rules slide occasionally can easily be discussed in a session zero. If it is important to you, bring it up and set up some guidelines and expectations. Otherwise, don't get upset about it happening. You can't expect other people to know your preferences if you've never clearly voiced them.
And I'm not sure whether they have an actual need to play according to the rules or genuinely just brought it up because they thought the other person might not be aware, simply thinking that everyone wanted to follow the rules.
Oh the backstory part reminded me of an exellent think I did with my last character.
so I had a very traumatic war story as his background that happened quite literally days before the party all met up. He had fresh wounds and bloody bandages but was very quickly patched up by the druid so not many people thought much of it. He also had a large war horse he was riding, as well as a broken sword and all my character would say is that his name is "Daren".
the Horse was a bit of a clunky pet as most of the campaign we were traveling between airships and on boats. So inevitable the horse passes away in an airship explosion that nearly tpk'd the whole party.
My character was very depressed by this, lashing out a bit and taking out his anger by excessively beating into a dragon that had come to attack us.
But like before, it was mostly brushed under the rug.
So finally after nearly 6 months of playing, (about once a week) we started to open up about each others pasts.
where after so long of bottling it up I was able to let my character open the flood gates of the events that led up to that point.
The backstory: Ophanage family gets drafted into war with a dragonborn nation, an accident occurs with a powerful dragon that kills most of his family and he is flung away into a river. when he finally comes to he returns to find one of his brothers, Daren, in bad shape inside the mouth of a dead dragon. he prys open the jaws and runs back to the camp. while hearing the feint whispers of his brother urging him along. only to when he gets back to overhear a commander say that his unit was fodder. That's when he realises his brother had been dead for a long time. So unable to handle the pain he blocks it away, steals a war horse and emotionally ties his feelings of lost to the horse by naming it Daren to cope.
When I reveal the name of my brother was Daren I could tell people were confused, but when I got closer to the end of the story people were actually crying. (myself included) As my character was generally light hearted, friendly, and always had others back.
I actually still have friends apologise for ignoring HIS feelings when the horse was shown to be dead and the party brushed it off.
so TL;DR: If you want a secret backstory just let it come out naturally, and don't tell anyone if it's not the right time, If I had said "that horse was my brother!" or something I would have sounded really weird! but actually, who knows, it might have been funny.
A player instantly leaving because a Mission fails on the last inch because of a story like this, it getting posted and getting called out on being rude? Sounds very realistic even if the ruleslawyer never ruined a mission befor. I can see one out of 7 ppl reacting that way. Especially because showing a vote on whether or not someone is an asshole also fits well into the ruleslawyer theme.
I am also a fan of honesty on the table. If I consider letting a rule slide because it's so cool right now I tend to say "You got so far and this idea is so cool, I want to let it slide" and it's a 5sec to 3min conversation and that's usually it.
one of my players characters has no memory of anything before 2 days before the first adventure started so i straight up asked him if i could write a secret backstory for his character and he found it a great idea:)
I’m waiting for leaks in my backstory. I’ll be honest, I tend to play characters that are rather straightforward about who they are, though they may not reveal all they know at once or all they are connected to. If confronted, they will often be open about it, not necessarily evasive. But that depends on if the others know to even ask the questions. And I always hide other tidbits of information. Having one huge secret is meh. I personally hide a few minor and one or two major ones. Some of these are open ended enough that the dm can hook and tie them into other aspects of the narrative or other people’s backstories. It’s not that complex to have this much.
For some examples from one character
- they have a phobia of remorhaz due to watching their lover brutally killed by one and not being able to protect anyone (they were the only survivor)
- their late lover was from the opposite side of the war
- their late lover’s sibling blames my character for the death of their sibling and has a one sided feud with my character. My character lets them due to their own guilt
- my character comes from a well off merchant family who’s dynamic with each other is all toxic, but are all located from the same home town as another player
- they know their first cousin has a secret child whose other parent is from the opposite side of the war. It would not only cause a scandal in their community, it would endanger the child. This has created tension between the first cousin and my character and is why the child is hidden to the point no other family members are aware of said child.
- my character is absolutely terrified of their grandmother, the family matriarch (think mix of white diamond from Steven universe and the grandmother from Encanto and you got an idea why).
- and my character is possibly a chosen of the storm/warrior god and has a mysterious sword (lightning damage and such powers) and the distinctive scars one gets from being struck by lightning.
All of this can be revealed. As I said, my character shares a home town with another player character and so they already picked up on the family name and it’s association. The eventual return to said town will likely lead to more revealed there. For the lover, well that’s easy. The feud going on will maybe reveal it or the phobia being triggered, even possibly a similar enough situation will bring enough of a reaction that my character could reveal why. The child could also be revealed from a confrontation with the family or coming across the other parent. Could also be revealed by the party going to the town where the child is being hidden and raised. Same with revealing the relationship between my character and the matriarch, just a simple return to the home town. And lastly, the reveal of my character’s connection to that god. The scars already hint at it as does the sword. My character will also reveal that they personally worship said god and basically all the clues that point at it will be in the open though one will have to ask.
And maybe this isn’t relevant, but it’s an ongoing joke that my character is secretly a spy. My character is actually a combat strong researcher actually, one who’s studies focus on linguistics. They often travel for that reason, are insightful, social and friendly, have friends in lots of places for this reason, have excellent calligraphy skills, excellent art skills (that they use to record things with accurately as possible), and are experienced enough that they could forge some very official looking documents. They also have ties to a faction that is basically a worldwide organization focused on gather, preserving, and protecting information. Basically a bunch of librarians. My character is also, as mentioned, combat strong which means they are sent into more dangerous places to conduct the research there and send reports back. So you can see why my character is joked about being a spy by the rest of the party. I basically told them “if they are a spy then they didn’t realize they were trained to be one or who they would be one for.” And that’s true. The home town is in a country that isn’t involved in the war between the other two neighboring ones, my character stepped away from their family to try and thrive away from the toxicity, and neither side of the war can lay claim to my character as they are a free agent of their faction, a neutral party, and who doesn’t even bother controlling my character’s movements and whims. Basically the only council my character keeps is their own. So a spy? Probably not. That requires them to have someone they consistently report movements to and obeys commands of. The faction sorta could claim this? But also can’t. Like I said, their dynamic with their faction is that they are freely able to do as they please. My character sending back their research is more courtesy on their part and the factions missions are always suggestions, not orders. To be honest, the faction more thinks of my character as one of the knowledge things they research, due to that god connection, than a fellow researcher, though their skills there are appreciated.
Anyway so yeah, secrets get revealed. Gotta be prepared for them to be, always.
I think that you should always trust the dm they have it figured out, if the dm wants to let something slide they will if they dont they wont
80% of my backstory was add libbed
Regarding the AITA story:
The DM didn't realize the wizard was out of spell slots? Simple solution: ASK! Example...
DM: "Hey, wizard, how's your spell slots holding up?"
Wizard: "I'm out..." *worried look*
DM: "Okay." *skips the Hold Person and does something else*
Also, regarding the last story:
🎶I've got a lovely bunch of coconuts... here they come a'flying at your head...🎶🤣
In the deadliest fruit story
Did no one have hold person? He had disadvantage on wisdom saving throws hold him.
Warlocks and Bards both can have it
To the AITA post, I don't think he was wrong for mentioning it. DnD has a lot of rules, even the best DM on the planet is still going to forget something. In this case the DM didn't forget and was going to let it slide, which is totally within his rights. The books don't run your game you do. He's acting like OP saying it out loud means that he has to do it now. If that's the way he wants to run it that's fine, but it's not OP's fault.