This Wannabe Main Character Was Not Like Other Girls - RPG Horror Stories
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 сен 2024
- Another new background! I've wanted to do a western themed one for a while, even before doing the custom sets. I thought it was high time that high noon gets some recognition in the tavern. Anyway, I've got a new D&D campaign to prep, I should probably get back to it.
RPG Horror Stories is a series where I read through stories from Reddit and my own email while giving advice on how to avoid the issues that lead to such stories in the first place.
📧 Send us YOUR TTRPG and DnD horror stories:
storiesforcrispy@gmail.com
Thumbnail Art:
Unstable Anomaly - Raven Demon
www.artstation...
Music:
D&D/CR Lo-Fi by Autumn Orange:
open.spotify.c...
/ sonicvaughn
/ @autumnorange613
Avatar animated by Slab of Cheese.
Check out her stuff: / @slabofcheese3521
🤠 Another new background to celebrate 45,000 subscribers! Decided to go with a western theme for this one.
Thank you so much for all the support. Couldn’t do this without you guys.
A lovely Background, that ornate revolver reminds me of Rosa's Unforgiven in Bayonetta2
Congrats on 45k Crispy. As a huge Weird West fan and guns in fantasy settings advocate (the more ornate and over-engineered the better!) I loved the new background.
I think the first story OP had one legitimate complaint (assuming it's accurate).
Just because your character's alignment is "Chaotic Evil" on your character sheet doesn't mean that everyone you meet automatically knows you're a bad guy and hates you.
OP also mentioned he killed only bad guys, is he supposed to "kill them nicely" like good aligned character?
@@realdragon The OP also mentioned being brutal towards prisoners, which is certainly going to lean them towards Evil.
But that still doesn't mean that every NPC has Always On Detect Evil.
@@roguebanshee A guild of Paladins might though.
I mean, an evil character can do good things, so that they will go under the radar. Good vs evil is the question of selflessness and selfishness. Also, anyone who gets away can talk about what happened to them and words can spread surprisingly quickly.
@@charnor2727 true about evil character doing good things for that reason but if what OP is saying is the full truth it seem the character likes helping good people but also likes torturing bad people I think it than depends on what the character sees as a bad person worthy of torturing.
That 2 month old had some groove.
I had a way darker and horrifying interpretation of this sentence before I saw it myself in the video. A true Out-of-Context Moment.
I’d let him groove.
fr
First one sounds like Chaotic Neutral more than Chaotic Evil. You treat your friends okay, random people don't even show up on your radar, and your enemies are brutally killed or tortured.
Regardless if its real or not, it kinda frustrating for someone else to decide what your character is and for NPCs to suddenly react to your alignment like they can see it hovering above your head.
I'ma say that if it is indeed real, everyone probably sucks (the writing had an air of being clueless to what they did wrong and just typed that in there anyway, but also felt like they left out some things to make them look better).
Tbf to the first guy before his tantrum, his character suddenly is evil and suddenly every person around him is treating him differently isn’t a way to go about alignment at all since, if he’s to be believed, he has actively done good things
While his barbarian sounds more lawful evil by limiting excessive cruelty to "acceptable targets", his brutal tortures definitely would affect how he's seen. A serial killer isn't good just because the victims were thieves. We don't even know what the "bad guys" were, like if their crimes could possibly warrant torture.
@@ArcCaravan random farmers in the middle of the sticks aren't likely to know about brutal tortures though so DM doing that is effectively punishing OP ingame
@@TheGhostFart No mention of random farmers, the only thing actually specified was a paladin guild.
@@TheGhostFart No mention of where that campaign takes place. Villagers could be locals who've met the party repeatedly.
“I only do bad things to people I have decided are bad, that makes me actually good!” This sounds uncomfortably real honestly, given current RL events.
Tbf, that also is what the alignment system of D&D is designed around. Gary Gygax had some fucked up ideas about morality
These are my 2 favorite "I'm not like other girls" examples.
1. "I'm not like other girls." The void beast said as she opened her inner eye, spread her six sets of scaled wings, and with her seven fanged mouths began to sing the song that ends time.
2. "I'm not like other girls. I have a penis."
That's the only two types of "I'm not like other girls" I tolerate.
That first example is just Zalgo.
I have to disagree on the takeaway for this being character bleed, the OP mentioned they got over it quickly when they reminded themself that it was in-character. However, the players behind those characters then started gloating about their in-game actions and bashing the OP's character with out-of-game insults for way too long. OP spoke up and was told out-of-character to shut up, etc. That's far from character bleed by that point. It's just bullying.
I completely agree.
I've been bullied out of game by a group I no longer play with..."Grow a thicker skin" being the mild end of things.
Seems like another case of "Easily judge/condemn OP who admits they could have done better even if they actually weren't bad". Plus another talk about bleed.
@@ArcCaravan I agree Crispy may have been a little off the mark about the bleed thing, but he never judged nor condemned the OP, and a reminder of what bleed means isn't "a talk"
I disagree, because the worst thing they do in the story is compliment the insults. How is this in any way bullying??? Like, kids do this in *school* lol. It's not like they made personal attacks on her. The most they did was talk up the roasts made at her character. If you think calling a character dumb as a bard insulting another character is bullying, I can't help but question how you're on the internet.
@@viennasavage9110 bro BULLYING is something kids do in school. Use your head.
Don't you hate it when your babies are born with their jobs pre determined? God, I'd hate to wonder how a "Cannibalistic Bandit Chief" baby was raised.
Sounds a lot like that Weird as hell Harem Anime I heard about…
@@danielramsey6141Which one? There are far too many lately.
"Well, we had to wean him on other babies, but people kept complaining for some reason..."
@@dwaynejackson551
The Harem anime was called “Conception”
@@danielramsey6141that is a game
6:05
"It made zero sense to have a king be racist towards a large chunk of his population"
Oh boy, I wish that was the least believable part about this story...
If you're an innately magical race and live in high magic city, then it makes sense for the king and the other residents to be jealous and mistrusting towards you. It's like living with someone with cheat codes to life.
Probably the most believable sadly
Not really, no...I'm an historian and I can't find any real life examples.
Are you mixing racism with classism or religious intolerance maybe?
@@TheBayzent I'm not 100% sure because this was over a month ago, but I was _probably_ taking that line at face value. As in, white king who is racist against the black people in his population
I gotta admit, I'm kinda on the side of the guy in the first story. If my DM unilaterally decided to change my alignment and have NPCs automatically know and treat me poorly, I'd be pissed.
Everyone sucked in that story.
@Tytoalba777 yea but op sucked the least
@@falxblade1352 They all equally sucked. That one player for going behind the player's back, the DM for not discussing this with OP first, and OP for going murderhobo to solve an out of game issue (lack of communication and sidelining his opinions) with in-game solutions (which would not have flown in a reasonable group of players).
And let's be honest, his barbarian definitely sounds more evil than anything. Good is about not inflicting atrocities on anyone, good or evil.
I can see it from the DM's point of view. The character is going around doing evil acts a lot. Things others would hear about a lot. Others reacting poorly to the character could simply be hearing of that character's evil deeds and reacting to that.
Sounds to me like that player either has it out for OP, or OP and that player don't get along and that player is trying to make the game more unpleasant for OP. I'm sure maybe OP did something to annoy that player, an incident happened in game and that player has a grudge, or something about OPs personality rubs that player the wrong way, but instead of talk it out with OP, they went behind their back to try to sabotage the game and try to drag the DM in the middle of it for extra protection. In that instance, that player was more in the wrong than OP. Either way, two players not getting along and constantly seething at eachother is a recipe for a blow up that has the potential to dissolve the game
To be fair to the first story, i was playing LG cleric. And when a magical liquid was forced onto me. I turned LE. My DM at the time immediately said i would attack my party and try to kill them. I argued back that i maybe lawful evil now but not lawful stupid. I lost my cleric spells for the next couple of sessions since I was evil, ain't no way i would try to kill my party. To keep from metagaming my party tried to make me slip up but i played my character to the hilt, just saying they magic potion stripped me of my cleric spells. Which is true so that wasnt even deception. I talked to the DM afterward to make sure we were on the same page. After the initial session I was more cruel, less caring for others, but i kept my party close since even an evil character cares for their own party, and selfishly for their own protection. Even goblins and kobolds work together so why wouldnt I? And later on the part fixed me up and i returned to my caring self. It was fun and role play was great.
Additionally, if they had problem with player why DM decided to punish player IN GAME instead trying to talk outside of game like they should
Sometimes proving the other players/DMs in-game isn’t the way to go. You only just put more ammo in the gun for them to use against you.
Attacking the party would be chaotic stupid not lawful stupid.
The whole "We'd never make you feel uncomfortable" spiel reminds me of that horror story where one player got his idea booed irl, and it made him so salty that he didn't believe the characters actually wanted to help when his character got abducted.
The guy in the first story had lawful evil and chaotic good mixed up. With that being said, having every single NPC magically know that you're evil is just ridiculous.
There's no one to root for in that story.
If he had a low charisma, I'd read it like he's TRYING to come off as nice and charming, but his violent attitude exhumes from him. So, maybe they don't know he's evil, but they can tell he's off putting
There's also his reputation to consider. If the characters have heard how dangerous he can be they'll probably shy away from him
Yep that’s literally the premise of the blood wars in the forgotten realms setting too. Lawful Evil does anything it deems necessary to destroy chaotic evil.
Yeah I first I also thought that was stupid until I realized we are only getting 50% of the story from an unreliable narrator.
We don't know how OP has acted towards people in front of other NPC, specially if some "bad guy" was around.
@@TheBayzent Not even that. Chaotic good doesn't mean you do violent and evil things for the greater good. It means you act on your own personal moral belief system to do what is right. Torturing someone is never right. Enjoying bloodshed and causing harm to people doesn't suddenly become okay or chaotic good just because the person you did it to was bad. At best that is a chaotic neutral character because that is a very gray character. And he was likely doing some pretty fucked up things if the others insisted that he was actually evil.
Regardless of how the OP in the first story was playing their character, for the DM to without any discussion change that player's character's alignment then punish them for that alignment change (let alone conspiring with another player to do this) is just flat out wrong. You don't treat the other people playing with you like that.
Your "Bard Baby" skit nearly knocked me over. Thank you, that was the laugh I needed today!
That first guy thinking that "only doing it to 'bad' people" makes you good is a peak example of one of the major problems with humanity. If you can convince some people that other people are "bad", you can convince them to commit attrocities.
It doesn't count as an atrocity if you do it to bad people, though, so you'd be in the clear.
@@tuomasronnberg5244 Uh no. There are quite a few things that are an atrocity you shouldn't do to anyone. Torture is an excellent example, I'm sure if you actually thought about it you could think of something too.
@@tuomasronnberg5244 Yes it still does count as an atrocity. That's the point. If you don't think so you are not a good person at heart.
Not to mention what constitutes as a good or bad person can be very subjective. Torturing prisoners into cooperating is in no way a good thing to do but OP felt justified in it for example
@@tarotsushima3332 Spoiler: EVERY bad person, up to and including the greatest mass murderers in history, felt justified. No one goes around thinking "gosh I sure am objectively unjustified in my actions and can think of no excuse. Guess I'll keep doing them!"
I laughed out loud with the "HE'S TWO MONTHS OLD"
For that first story, I had a similar character. Her thing was basically "I want to help everyone and I will help everyone, but the minute you become a threat to me or my friends, I will tear you limb from limb." She was essentially a mama bear
But did your character enjoy tearing people limb from limb with the flimsiest of excuses? Definitely sounds like there's difference between not holding back against actual threats and brutally torturing prisoners because they're "bad guys".
@@ArcCaravan i like how you're responding to basically every post on the first story with a similar "BUT WHAT IF THE PRISONERS WERENT ACTUALLY BAD????????"
@@TheGhostFart No. He's responding with "torturing people is bad."
@@shadenox8164That's slightly debatable. "Beating up uncooperative prisoners" can mean anything from brutally torturing a captured pickpocket who looked at him funny to punching a Nazi who won't tell where the kidnapped people are and is laughing about how they're going to be killed soon.
It's understandable that some people would be a bit iffy about pushing the idea that it was definitely the first one and that the only way to view the story is with the character reenacting the most horrible crimes in history against anyone he didn't like and therefore saw as "bad". There's plenty to be said about harming largely helpless prisoners regardless, but there's at least an argument to be made about someone being so disgusted by acts of truly monstrous evil that they just lash out. The same can't be said about jumping to do unspeakable things any time you're left alone in a room with anyone at all and then calling them bad to justify it.
I can't see why anyone would want to sew drama and then make that drama all about themselves. That sounds not only dumb, but very self defeating as well.
Some people thrive on the attention, and seek to make mountains out of molehills. That way, either the drama goes away and nobody dares antagonize them again for fear of the next tantrum, or they play the victims to gather sympathy from everyone else. Basically win-win for them. Sorcerer was just upset she didn't get her way here.
@@shadiafifi54 Yeah, she was pretty pissed it didn't go her way.
It's just pointless to act like that though. At some point people are going to lose their temper with these people and it's not going to go their way.
Making my next character a reincarnated bard who kinda remembers past life abilities just because of that stupid backstory 😜
I had an idea for a legendary flutist who, at the command of a young king, was afflicted with undeath. The kingdom fell less than a decade later, and now he's a level 1 skeleton, because he has no lungs in which to play his flute and has to learn guitar
1st story - the OP actually seems to have been chaotic neutral, not evil.
Assuming the first guy really was doing some good stuff too i think his complaint is legit. Character sounds more like a particularly nasty chaotic neutral then chaotic evil imo
I was *not* expecting the saxophone!
Who gave that baby a sax?😂
Bards just spawn instruments after a while, its a natural trait.
Intro Story: I kind of feel like I could see the point the OP is making. If they were, like, going into a rage and bludgeoning bandits to death or torturing bad guys a bit too hard because they couldn't handle pain the same way that a big brutish barbarian might, that's reasonable for someone like that to do. And if they were only that terrible in combat or at times where excessive brutality were necessary, I wouldn't see that as a reason to change one's alignment. If the character was, for the most part, doing good and being kind outside of these few acts of brutality, but those acts were enough to prompt an alignment shift, switching from CG to CN makes some sense, balancing out the bad with the good, rather than making such a dramatic full shift from good to evil. I wouldn't have as strong of an opinion about this if it didn't also change the way the world interacted with the character; if the barbarian brutally killed some bandits, and then, in private with only the party around, tortured some guy a bit too hard, what would cause the rest of the world to suddenly treat him as untrustworthy if he's been a decent guy otherwise? It could be that OP is lying about just how good he was outside of these evil incidents, but if not, that's such a drastic change to the game itself, and if that is the case, I could say OP was justified in showing them how CE could be done in order to show that his original alignment was correct.
This is all assuming that OP Is being honest, of course. Who can say? I didn't expect this to be a super-long comment, but I've never seen a character's alignment shift change the way the world interacts with them like that. Like, people can just sense that OP is now evil and distrust him regardless of what good he's done for them before? That seems so weird.
I knew it wasn't going to happen but I expected the saxophone from tears of the kingdom at the part with the two months old bard.
all these horror stories make me grateful that the only thing bad that happened to me playing a ttrpg was irritating my arthritis from writing too much
Honestly with the first story I’d say they were more true neutral, not always evil but also not always good just a more chaotic neutral
I just want to add, after watching a slew of your videos over the coming months, I can definitely hear the differences between when you first started recording these and the most recent. You have gotten more comfortable in presenting these stories and offering them sort of as a story you created. While I am a member of these Reddits myself, I enjoy watching your videos more. 😁
Also, congratulations on the subs! You've earned it
The baby bard bit left me cackling, thank you crispy
I feel like the DM and the other player deciding OP's character was CE without talking to OP was scummy. If that really did happen of course
Your humor and your perseverance to pronounce "wizard/fighter/warlock" made my day! I couldn't not subscribe and like at this point! Great way to read the story, btw, because I normally fell anxious watching or reading RPG Horror Stories and this video was the opposite, very relaxing and funny!
Had a similar character. My dude was a vengeance Paladin, sworn to punish the wicked and avange his order, of whom he was the last surviving member after some nobels thought they where doing their job to good. Anyhow, my character was helpful, healing people, aiding those in need and fighting for those who could not fight for themselfs. However, the slightes transgression in what he precived to be good and lawfull, he punished with a brutal passion. I had him beat the crap out of a merchant who scamed a few people out of their pocket money. He killed a druid and a rouge for setting up the old "Druid turns into horse, Rouge sells druid to some local dude, and in the night Druid leaves the stables as a human" and scaming farmers.
He brutally tortured a corupt guard to tell him if any other members of the city watch where in his schemes together with him and last but not least, he burned down the house of a minor noble (inculding his entire family) for misstreating the peasants (and killing a young girl) around his estate. The DM eventually decided that my character was to brutal and that that would not be the way of a Paladin. However, after much arguing, I pushed through that my paladin only was following his oath he had vowed. To punish the wicked, not matter their status and their might. No matter how small the crime was, my guy went in full Batman-Mode. Only much more brutal and efficient.
Just use the prayer from The Boondock Saints as the explanation if you get complaints, it makes a PERFECT Vengeance oath. "And shepherds we shall be; for Thee, My Lord, for Thee. Power hath descended forth from Thy hand, that our feet may swiftly carry out Thy command. So we shall flow a river forth unto Thee, and teeming with souls shall it ever be."
Upmost respect for multi-class for handling the fallout with civility and not making a fight!
Most mature of the bunch, if you ask me. Sorcerer is kind of a whiny baby but OP also seems pretty annoying in game, so I feel like multiclasser just ended up in the middle of the drama.
If my friend drags me into a groupchat filled with a drama I'm not a part of, my message is going to be "I'm not a part of. I am leaving. Don't pull this again, [friend]." before leaving
I used to rank you lowest of the D&D reading food chain
Drake is the guy with the attitude and a sharp tongue
Crab is for good vibed
And Crispy for when either hasnt posted
Im so happy to see you found your own unique style and vibe for your content, the skits the little edits you do and even your voice work improves your vids alot!
That voice change made it clear the first story's OP was the villain of the story. Not just because of the alignment change.
There were no good guys in that story. Alignment changes should ve discussed with the player, not decided with a different player. And the fact that the entire world changed around the player once his alignment officially changed (twice!) is incredibly dumb.
I would've done the same, would've range from cartoonish evil to a war crime.
I dont know man, seems like malicious compliance to me lmao the sm sorta brought it on themselves.
@@andreacallegari7137I agree but with anything you should always remember who is telling you the story.
OP looks like a douche in the story he himself is writing. So the reality is probably a lot worse than he is letting on.
@@skipfire00 Should DM have kicked OP for making people uncomfortable with graphic torture scenes?
6:55 As a DM for 20 years I have noticed a trend in the last decade where many girls who are new into D&D do tend to use this victimization angle a lot...to the point that when teaching new people I have to explicitly forbid "victim as a personality".
One of my friends got really annoyed at first and made a bubbly chubby gnome druid to mock the new rule and it ended up being her favorite character by the end of the campaign.
Two great skits in a single episode, what a treat!
ombre hair is like when one shades lighter then the other that thing where you get your hair did and its like blonde near the edges but brown around the roots but usually doesn't look like a bad dye jerb
And I learned something new today. Thanks!
@@shadiafifi54 2 things maybe i think the words also French for like two tones but I might be wrong its also not just blonde / brown think of the silver black or like green other color look (as examples)
I mean, that style was big in the 90s and early 00s
I just love the fact that Crispy just clicked those two shots together by himself.
Remember kids, drinking by oneself is the first step, on a dark and somber road to... Alcoholism!
"I was born a scientist in a village of musicians, and I was bullied for it."
6:00 - "*Distressed noises* Comment withheld" got me good 😂
The *There's sometihng wrong with our baby!* skit killed me 🤣🤣
I’m really loving the skits you’ve started adding in these stories, you’re really funny Crispy! And it’s nice to see you adding more of your own humor and opinions into the readings, I don’t play dnd very much but im glad I found your videos
"My character is good because I said so! but it does evil things but it does so much good!" It's neutral at best. but it's not good.
YOOOO new vid dropped les go. always love listening to these when doing random stuff :)
that sketch man, that was fire.
First story is literally labeling theory of criminology. You call someone the bad guy long enough and they start to believed it, and then they start to really embody it because why the hell not act like the bad guy if people are calling you that anyways.
I've had a DM try to forcefully change my characters alignment before. So at first I had sympathy for the OP of the first story but... Then they just kept talking lol 😂 I think everyone sort of sucks in that story and it definitely feels heavily embellished, though the alignment should not have been shifted like that and the NPC should not have treated OP different because of the unwanted shift. The DM and their friend sucked, and everyone was trying to solve issues in character instead of solving them by talking things out.
If anyone is wondering, I was playing a lawful evil character whose end goal aligned with the party goal. So even though there were somtimes conflicts in how we got the job done, we all wanted to get the job done. My character didn't go around hurting people, or blackmailing people, or doing blatantly non-lawful evil things all the time... So DM said my character was now "Lawful Neutral." Then whenever the character did something evil because usual methods didn't work AKA evil but within the law, the DM said "you can't do that because your character isn't evil." Lol As if freedom of choice isn't what guides alignment. 😆
OP getting treated differently makes sense considering he was gleefully torturing people with the excuse of "they're bad guys" with no further elaboration. Though he sounded more Lawful Evil than Chaotic Evil.
Your alignment shift story definitely sounded worse since your DM denied your character a choice just because they didn't do it frequently. Meanwhile this Barbarian wasn't made to do anything or denied a choice, simply facing the consequences of his cruelty, not until choosing of his own accord to be a murder hobo out of spite.
@@ArcCaravan punishing someone in game is never the answer, the murder hobo was malicious compliance
@@TheGhostFart That wasn't a punishment that was an alignment shift based on behaviour a casual torturer is not what most would consider good, and yes a paladin guild isn't going to like an evil guy. And nah murder hobo wasn't malicious compliance, it was just being petty. What they should have done was sit down and discuss what they think the alignments met and get on the same page.
@@TheGhostFart Malicious compliance just shows how petty OP is, being smugly spiteful because off reasonable consequences. It's not like OP tried to discuss things, just ruining the game for everyone until baby got his bottle for free. If DM is wrong for "punishing someone in-game", how is OP not guilty of punishing everyone in-game and out?
I felt that "comment withheld" in my *bones.*
I mean I got to play a LE hobgoblin Evocation wizard once and it was one of the most fun campaigns ever. Was it brutal, sure, but we established a few ground rules.
I joined the campaign a bit later, so it was in a scripted encounter and to make things smooth the party cleric essentially saved my life.
As a result I forged a contract with her, to help repay what I considered a personal debt. This also helped me in a number of ways.
1 Because I was a foreigner to the sword coast and I was not well versed in the laws or moralities of the region.
2 Because state executions and slavery were fairly common in my homeland, my opinion of law and justice was very different to the current party norm.
At the end of our first big fight the enemy was surrendering, I attempt to take slaves, when told that's illegal, I'd confirm first with our cleric, a trustworthy sort.
Given that, I would suggest binding their hands, bending them down on the road side, and summarily executing them for crimes against the realms, banditry, murder and theft.
I was told that these crimes while still taken seriously are usually not settled with road side execution, and at worst, should likely face judgement by the state.
After arguing about their clear homicidal intent, and reminding the party, it was at least 2 days march to the nearest village, and that desperate men are likely to slit our throats while we sleep,
I proposed a solution to our paladin, the one who disagreed with me the most. He dropped a zone of truth, and to everyone's surprise (even my own) I was correct.
DM had no intention of sugar coating it, the bandits all were forced to either stay silent and not incriminate themselves further, or admit if the fight had gone their way, we'd be dead.
After that session we all agreed that it was best to not accept surrenders anymore unless our job is to take someone back alive for questioning or something like that.
The encounter shook up the party a fair bit, and we got to enjoy a nice long slaying undead arc for a few sessions after that, no moral questions to get in the way.
I get that the first guy was a That Guy, but do not change a players alignment without their consent. And alignment instantly effecting treatment by NPCs is meta, and rather targetting. A better method would have been just having people fear them. That would have had a similar effect. Or, yah know, tell them this doesn't match their aligment? Everyone sucked in that first story.
Problem player begins to form xD
Great choice of words
Extends ring of power: "Main character!"
"Entitlement!"
"Lack of accountability!"
"Narcissism!"
"With yor combined powers you have summoned me! Captain Problem Player!"
**rolls d20** "Yes it was a nat 20! Don't look at my dice!"
First sounds like chaotic neutral over chaotic good
Hm. She reminds me of my Ex.
Took me three years to realize to it, but...good lord. That one's a bit of a handful there, and I'm glad I'm recovering from my own experience, slow as it is.
Natural bards reminds me of the kids from d20 fantasy high whose parents were impregnated magically regardless of former natural ability to give birth after a rock ‘n’ roll concert, who were born with little denim vests and Mohawks and ascended to the plane of pure rock when they reached 18
The meltdown
If someone had asked me to guess, I would have sorted Crispy into the saxophone section for sure.
Is it just me, or do the Warlock and Sorcerer class characters seem to make up most main character syndrome cases?
I usually see it happen with Paladins or Rogues. Main character syndrome can happen with any class, though some do offer more opportunities with powers that can be tied into the plot (sorcerous origins, pacts, deities, etc).
It's understandable actually, the flavor text for Sorcerer's is literally "You're born special and powerful", very appealing to Mary Sue types. Warlock appeals more to edgelords but for the same reason, the flavor text, Warlocks are power house casters that for pacts with (most often with Fiends or Old Ones) powerful entities. Playing a tortured soul syndrome demonic minion is the edgelords bread and butter next to rogue.
Love your intro! Kallia and Daphne forever. ❤
Not like other girls indeed.
What is ombré?
In French, ombré means “shade” or “shadow.” In the hair color world, ombré is a dramatic, two-toned hair color effect that is typically darker at the top and lighter on the bottom. Often the dark top section is your natural hair color shade, and the bottom section is lightened with hair lightener.
"Apparently doing bad things to a few people makes me evil."
Well... yes. Doing _evil things_ on occasion is _evil._
"I would gladly stop if I wasn't evil." And that's why you're evil.
Intro Story. I think a lot of people get confused by Character Alignment. Your character's alignment is not how you perceive your actions. It is how you act in context of what the culture you are from considers good and evil, orderly or chaotic. And as you encounter other cultures, it might be different. Think of a Chaotic Good Paladin who takes an oath to rid the world of Evil for their version of Righteousness. The culture they grew up in, an order of Paladins with the same mindset, would see this as Good as they too murdered everyone they thought of perpetuating Evil. Yet to others outside that culture, they would be perceived as Heros, Blood Thirsty Savages, Misguided Zealots, etc. by how those people perceived morality.
It is for these reasons I think Alignment is fairly broken and rarely do I use it for more than a guideline on how an NPC would act.
It is not strictly a cultural thing. In D&D lore (which doesn't matter for a homebrew world, but is what the game assumes), your alignment determines which plane you go to after death, and creatures/spells like a Sprite's Heart Sight can tell your alignment. In D&D lore, Good is Good no matter what, and Evil is Evil no matter what. If anything, the deities decide, not mortal-made cultures. Just because a knight was raised in a LE culture that considers it good to kill civilians who don't support the nobles, doesn't mean that character can put LG on their sheet for being their culture's #1 civilian-killing knight. They'd just be a delusional LE character.
@@LizBlizzard You are applying your definition of Good and Evil as absolute. Instead of looking at it from the point of the character's culture. Decades ago there was a NPC Paladin that was CG in a D&D release that went around murdering any whom they decided was evil. I remember it as I thought it was a little messed up then. But that is "lore" also.
Look at it thru the eyes of a religious warrior. They have been told by their god thru the priests that rewards for their good deeds await them in the hereafter and they can guarantee that by killing all those who don't believe as they do. As they define Good it is Good. Not as you define Good though.
And ultimately it comes down to the individual table. How each group defines Good/ Evil, Lawful/ Chaotic at their table. And many times it is not clearly defined even then. Which is why Alignment is and has been broken.
@@davidtherwhanger6795 it's not my definition that matters, it's the definition the game lore assumes. Because in D&D, unless you are homebrewing the world (which most people do anyway), morality is objective. Just like everything else about the game, the DM can take a look at it, say "that's stupid," and then change it as they see fit. But RAW, that's how it works.
CG is, canonically, one of the alignments that get away with the most. So even if I personally would find such a character to be evil, they'll probably still end-up in the CG plane unless the DM is running a homebrew setting.
Alignment works if you play with objective morality, but not all tables do (mine included), so it ends up being broken for those tables in specific. But it works perfectly fine if you run things as the game expects you to.
These arguments against character alignments feel like overthinking morality to the point of nihilism. Just an excuse to say "alignment system is bad".
@@LizBlizzard I honestly cannot understand what it is you are saying. On one hand you say Good cannot by RAW. But on the other hand you say it can by RAW. And this is somehow not broken?
Love the new Intro!!! 🤠
Okay, so first character isn't chaotic good, but not chaotic evil either. Honestly the Alignment chart is... without nuance, depending in your DM.
"So wouldn't it make sense that the book would be blank?" Not really it would make more sense for there not to be a book blank or not. You don't have book of a race you are trying to unperson.
diggin the new intro and background!
You can be brutal towards villains. I do not see the harm in brutalizing villains.
7:24 abab (assigned bard at birth)
I think a better name for the multi-class combo coulda been Wightlock (wi)(ght)(lock). Kinda sounding like a cool character concept. 🤔
In the story about the main character syndrome. Is she trying to be both Sasuke & Itachi?
Not automatic captions actually writing out wizfilock.
2:37
I don't know who those two are, but they look so cute together.
I'm not like other girls; I like mixing Kahlua with Atkins brand protein shakes
8:19 - we all love projection.
I am confused by the sorcerer and wizfilock dating thing. I thought the multiclasser was the DM's IRL friend and he had just met the rest of the group recently. So what's the order of events there? Did they start dating when he joined the group, or was it just a "hey, small world" kind of coincidence?
I think the group know each other irl cuz I think OP also said that sorcerer is a relative of theirs? So probably a small world thing
The melt down
You need to clip the born a bard bit into it's own short
Ohh I like the flavor on the new intro. SAUCE.
I will never understand why these groups with so much drama just try and keep the game alive. As soon as I get a Wiff of drama I'm out . I play dnd for fun the second that stops well I got other hobbies. I can find another group where people just want to have a fun session and then go home
well some people just have more patience if sombody did this to me i would not be able to deal with them again evan outside dnd
I will be devil's advocate, in first story PC is killing bad guys in brutal gory ways, not a big deal. However DM decides that every NPC suddenly doesn't trust PC for no reason, did every NPC he talked to heard the PC is killing bad guys... and because of that they don't trust them... And if it was issue then why the fuck DM DIDN'T TALK ABOUT THIS OUTSIDE OF THE GAME BUT TRIED TO PUNISH PLAYER INSIDE GAME
It's the normal reaction of most people if they see some one take great pleasure in brutally killing others to fear that person. And if enough people relate the tale, others will believe it even if it is not true. And react the same, fearing the brutal killer.
I get where the PC should have been warned about the Alignment Change. But the rest is basic social interaction as the PC's probably didn't just run off to a new place, but stayed where their reputation was known.
@@davidtherwhanger6795 It's normal reaction that DM instead talking to player just changes every NPC behavior to not trust PC out of nowhere?
How many times did Crispy and others said to solve out of character problems by talking not by punishing player in game
@@realdragon First. This is behavior NPC could have due to what they have seen or heard. Not out of Nowhere. As a Character gains levels, the more renown and recognition they get over a wider area. OP never said they left their operating area and it still happened.
Second. Crispy and others have said that. But how is a character brutally murdering NPC's in game an Out of Game problem?
And Third. I said it was a normal reaction of people to fear those who they see and have heard brutally murder other people. So why would the NPC's Not want to shun that character? Why would they want to interact with someone they think could go off on them? And if you don't believe they would, why then do people do that to Veterans suffering from PTSD, Gang Members who kill to make a point, Bullies who beat up others for fun, etc.?
I do believe that before forcing the Alignment Change that the DM should have talked to the Player. But I also believe the DM did as I don't believe OP due to how the story ended. And I think Crispy would back me on this that OP didn't come off as totally truthful.
While DM and other player should have tried talking it out, OP was worse for smugly becoming a murder hobo out of spite. OP was lucky the paladins didn't brutally kill the barbarian with the exact same logic of "bad people can be tortured guilt free".
@@davidtherwhanger6795 All NPCs seen and heard OP brutally killing BAD GUYS? Did party had whole village following party to dungeon? And even then EVEN THEN not every NPC would give a fuck since OP was killing bad guys, people who did bad things. And quite a lot of people don't give a shit irl if criminals suffer.
And other player went to DM to talk how OP is bad outside of the game so DM decided to punish OP in game. If someone brings issue outside of game you should talk about it outside of a game
the meltdown
first story is why i'm glad alignment doesn't exist anymore. created more problems than it solved
The Meltdown
Not gonna lie, loving the western intro
The Meltdown.
I love autumn oranges cr lofi
The meltdown.
Alignment is kind of bogus since good and evil are defined differently by culture. What a noble Drow thinks is right will be different from a little human village
The meltdown.
re:intro; Your character delights in torture, torment and inflicting pain and suffering, and you know (or think) you can get away with it by only targeting characters in opposition of "good." That skews more towards lawful evil/lawful stupid, IMHO.
I do have to agree, however, that suddenly making every NPC suspicious of their character doesn't make sense. If they treated shop-keeps, tavern-masters, inn-keepers, etc. fairly, they wouldn't know about any of the questionable choices they made... heck, maybe even the party members would just be like "glad he's on our side." Everybody sucks in this story.
I'm extremely suspicious of someone who thinks the majority of the party is an issue.
I love players dropping random backstory that they didn't check with me, I've always had a fun solution for that, you are wrong, that didn't happen, mind flayers messed with your memories.
It takes 20 min to check with me if I'm running your game to see if X, Y or Z is appropriate for our table. If you're not willing to do this, and are overtly undermining some of the world building I'm doing for you AND the other players, you get your backstory rewritten by me so it fits within the world. To BAD, so SAD.
I hate players attempting to trauma dump while still ruining the state of the world, like if she had been abducted and abused by some secret cult or something I can at least do something with that, and maybe write it in, with some degree of nuance. But flat out attempting to change a major capital city and a major regional monarch just for your own backstory. I don't play those games.
Crispy i'm now extremely curious how long you have played the saxophone.
Real players play as a Neutral good Human Knight from a lower noble family with an uneventful childhood of proper schooling and martial training due to a noble. His mother and father are both alive and supportive and the peasants of his family's land respect them well enough.
I mean, D&D uses violence as a frequent conflict resolution, with some truly horrific means of eliminating opposing forces, and I could theoretically see a chaotic good character doing some really nasty things in a moment of desperation while overall keeping their alignment. However, depending on how the player handled their character using torture I'd use different responses. Maybe bump them down to chaotic neutral or if they were really getting into it out of character, then I'd boot them.
Intro: I mean, Chaotic Good characters can kill or torture bad guys for information. But there's a difference between making the killing quick, or offering your own method to get info and waiting for someone to ask you to do what you must, and then there's making it needlessly long and cruel, and taking emmense pleasure in someone else'a suffering.
A Chaotic Good character isn't afraid to do less than pleasant things to others, but those are usually last resort situations like "Okay...we tried literally everything else under the sun...so I guess that means..." *Cracks knuckles* "We're gonna have to make Asmodeus proud."
Chaotic Good isn't afraid to torture a person information, but they would rather not have it come to that extreme, and will probably not like having to do it, bit will deal with it cause its necessary to get the info they need to do good