"Is ThAT DaRK mAgIC!?" It's a spell literally almost every low-level spell-caster has access to. Man those players were LOOKING for excuses to PvP for... no damn reason? Glad the GM booted them and sided with the member being targeted.
Almost funny how vague the "dark magic" the Paladin hates is. Nothing like necromancy, warlock patrons, sorcerer origins, or anything that can actually be identified to anyone else.
@@ArcCaravan Right? Like, these guys were looking for excuses to be dicks. I bet they marched out "Its what my character would do" in the private chats with the DM.
Its also the race spell of tieflings. Asmodues or something is the subrace that has it. Honestly i feel like mentioning that would add to their racism.
Mad respect to the DM who didn't allow the party to kill the Rouge just for being half drow. Sad to see it went bad but I'm glad that the DM got sick and tired of the horrible mistreatment at the rogue for being a rogue and for being half drow. Shame on the humans to make the wood elf or eladrin bard turn on the rogue. Irony that the rogue "100% didn't tell (them) everything" was incorrect since the rogue was honest to the party so they'd trust them. It's hilarious that the party gangs up on the rogue and the DM was like "I've had enough, Rogue, kill" and was actively on the Rogue's side. Props to them
I feel less inclined to pity the Bard since he still agreed to gang up on OP and nothing hinted they regretted it. I'm guessing they were the only one without some excuse in-game to join besides "I felt like it".
Oh we're cursing people??? May the whole party who tried to kill the Drow always miss one sock, may their shoes be filled with the piss of their pets and if they don't have any, may their houses have rat infestations. May everyone's schedules be interfered by major inconveniences. And may their sleep be deprived of restfulness.
The Party Tried to Kill Me: I feel like the problem here was that, rather than resolving their issues with OP face-to-face, the rest of the group instead conspired behind OP's back, even attempting to rope DM into their conspiracy. They apparently made up their minds to dislike OP on sight, and it was clear that no amount of trust building exercises would win them over.
the worst thing is that it could've been resolved by them just asking "hey is your character actually evil?" out of character. sure it may be "meta gaming" to some but i think it would have been a fair thing to just ask outright
@@Kevinblue035 No, they knew they weren't evil. Either they are really dumb/narrow minded or they were using the drow thing as some lame excuse to bully cause it was established several times he was a half-drow and told the party everything. This was quite clearly some stupid "bUt itS wUt mY cARactOr wOoD dEw" situation. The facr they were gone after even proves how petty they were and this was not based on anything but disliking OP for some reason
@@keybladewizard49 Oh,I don't actually stick around for that long. Not everything's a Marvel movie,if the video's ending,then it's ending,Time to watch a different one.
honestly i feel bad for mr.kobold because the idea of him being insecure about being a kobold and losing his powers to transform into a buff sexy dragonborn would have been a great way to kick off a character arc about learning to accept who he is and love himself the way he is and not having to be super macho all the time and raging at the drop of a hat, but instead the GM had to make it a weird excuse to force sex scenes
In this case it could've been all about conquering his insecurities amd learning better how to deal with them, even though they may still sometimes appear.
Also maybe it had to do with the homebrew, but RAW he shouldn't even be able to have sex while raging, because he has to attack or receive damage each round or the rage ends. (Or did DM force BDSM as well?)
The party trying to kill the rogue story is an oldie but a damn good one. 'I've have enough, kill them.' Ah, yes. Good. KEEL. Sure, you could say 'DM should have stopped this sooner' or 'OP should have spoken to the DM' but then...the resolution wouldn't have been this sweet.
Definitely a better ending than expected. Surviving a 4v1, DM ending the fight in the solo player's favor, and kicking the other players from the campaign.
Story 1 Oh woooow. DM puts the group into a hard battle, has a temper tantrum when the players complains, and then doesn’t give them their hard earned rewards. I would leave too.
Especially since he ignored all player successes and just auto failed them, even when the dude rolled a 1 on a d100, which is the best roll you could possibly get for that game. Like, if you don't want them to succeed, don't have them roll, because that just gives the illusion of possible success. At the same time, for something like that, you should make it possible to succeed, because it gives player interaction with the story, rather than just a railroad. And then to give BS excuses about why they failed when they should have succeeded. "Oh, yes you got the highest roll you could have gotten, and, out of anyone here, should know if these guys are with the group you work for or not, but since they're wearing uniforms, you still think they are with the group, even though they aren't." Or "Even though you succeeded on your medical treatment of the guy that was uninjured and magically dying for no reason, you somehow triggered a bomb in his head that is nowhere near where you were treating and his head explodes and he dies."
I honestly thought the half dragon was saying "Dra...gon" not whatever the name of the Sorcerer's father was. That group were being d*cks. Glad the DM handled it after that (probably should have warned OP about the other players plans, even if it was cryptically).
Flirting with everything is not a bard thing or exlusive to a bard; it's one of the worst attributes I've heard about a class in general besides lawful stupid paladins and rogues' kleptomania.
Oh god, I was doing chores while listening to this video and froze when I realized you started reading my story (Stole The DM's Job). I swear that's just so surreal I have to completely agree with you about dealing with abuse like that. I may have been the start of ending that chokehold on the DM, but everyone else helped when they realized and I told them that things weren't going okay, or right. Don't ever hesitate to ask someone if they're alright if you even *think* they're in an abusive situation; you never know when you reaching out might just get the ball rolling and get them somewhere happier and safer. As for Sky and Elise... Something funny about him getting booted? Elise's disappearance did absolutely nothing to the plot. We simply continued. Neither her nor her family left any impact at ALL and the DM is now happily using the Feywild in incredible ways in our campaign. I always find it quite funny that for all hers and Sky's attention hogging, Elise didn't really matter to the world in the end
I'd have loved to been an audience in that call when those morons were trying to give justification to the dm why their characters all jumped at the chance to kill OP especially after they'd made the promise of not doing it
The DM should have stepped in for the rogue much sooner than they did. And those players did force the DM to solve the problem in game rather than out. It was just a crappy situation all around.
It sounds to me like the players were trying to drive the OP from the game, but the reason is unclear. If the OP had come in with a completely different character, they might have come with some excuse to go after that character, so ditching the half-drow likely would not have solved the underlying problem. This is one story that I would really like to hear from a different point of view, such as the DM or one of the other players. I agree - it is a generally crappy situation, and I hope everyone involved learned some lessons from it.
@@heatherharrison264 That may well be the case Heather. It's hard to know given how those players straight up lied to the DM. So we couldn't in all honesty trust anything said by any one of them. Having the DM weigh in on it is really the only way to get more to work with as it were. Honestly, it's just stupid for people to act this way at the table. And pointless.
@@marybdrake1472 yeah like he was gonna step in but watching the party's fruestration build as they wasted their last spells and actions missing every single one of them was just too fun
The story with the half drow player getting back up from the DM is the karma I hope for in those situations. That group engineered a vendetta for no good reason.
“They give a bit of an opening too by letting you roleplay a character related to your character’s backstory if you want” Wow, I’ve never heard of this being done before and I LOVE this idea so much. Just wanted to say that lol.
pausing to laugh at "i would have confronted him once he took away my precious flower describing thats my job you fuck" keeping this in my pocket. but for real, as someone who had an abusive friend, sometimes it really takes just one person to help untangle such an awful web that others are stuck in. really wish it were me, but at least lesson learned. and good for all of them getting out of there
About story two's Crispy's comment: I'm in a D&D westmarches server and made a new character, a werewolf. A friend of mine who is playing a Bloodhunter turned into a werewolf against his will told me: "Hey. My character haters werewolves and would kill or cure your character so, please let's never make them meet!" I found that to be refreshing and amazing. Instead of creating drama in the future, he told me why our characters shouldn't interact and how to solve that and, since it's a west-marches, than can easily be solved!
Story 3 We learned how hard it can be for one person to RP multiple NPC’s in one campaign. Enough so that we asked the DM if we could take the load off their shoulders since we were a text rp. Sky is being a camera hogging bully who took advantage of the DM’s friendship to be a Mary Sue. The death penalty to leave Feywild would have been the last straw.
I've had a similar experience to the drow story but it ended really goo. I play dnd mostly with close friends from school so we know each other quite well. I was playing a human fighter-warlock multiclass and the party had a paladin that was very much against demonic magic. Our Backstories were connected that the Kingdom my character came from are basically descendents from his tribe that wanted to live a less religious life. Whenever my character used his warlock magic the Paladin would get suspicous but my character kept on lying by saying he recieved minor Wizard training in the past. These confrontations never got further than a slap on the wrist and got really fun once my character began gaining more and more from his patron and becoming more greedy. They were constantly having vocal arguments about how the Paladin comes from a backwood tribe and just doesn't know what modern magic looks like. It really added to roleplay in a fun way.
She didn't advocate for herself, she just kept quiet while he flirted with her and hoped he's "get over it". We also don't know if she said something like "I'm just not into you that way" or something like "you're a really great friend"; two statements that can be perceived to have either the same meaning or very different meanings depending on who hears it. The guy was clearly a total douchebag there, but we need more information if we want to make a judgement call on whether or not it was ENTIRELY his fault.
@@ArcCaravan Yes, but he didn't stop. He was definitely at fault, but she still should have either insisted harder or asked someone else to help her deal with him.
It was kind of jumped over, but the DM also had a character seduce and sexually engage with a character who was under the influence of a spell. That is definitely not a consenting situation. That is SA. I've never had to address that in a game, but if I were a DM and a player wanted to do something like that it would lead to some serious conversations out of game. In game, I would make it clear that the spell would fail. I do not allow charms, etc, to allow characters to do that to each other.
That story was a doozy. I'm glad the player narrating it didn't see, overly traumatised by what went down, but if you were to reverse the genders, I think we might see people reacting much more negatively. It was clear the player was not comfortable with those kinds of interactions, and yet the DM kept forcing it on them, and eventually escalated to outright in-game coercion/assault. That was 100% out of line and completely skeevy. Just because the DM was a woman doesn't make her any less of a creep.
Ok I do love the party turning story, just hearing the DM go "OK, I've had enough of their stupidity. Give em hell." He definitely just was sick of the quartet (or at least trio, since they roped the Bard into their bias) and just decided to use OP as the engine of his karma.
23:30 I did that in a campaign but my character was also a pathological liar so I basically told the DM that my character absolutely had no idea of what he was saying was true or not.
Story 4 “Sex is the real level up” Me: Pffft. You owe me a new keyboard! I agree that having tattoos be this sorta “become someone different” or gain their powers. Same with being compelled to spill blood to maintain their powers. That is classic “deal with the devil” stuff right there. Too bad this DM ruined both ideas to make ber weird monster fucker fan fic. Like… gurl, even I am not this blatant about my attractions while I play-that is what fan fiction and following nsfw artists are for. The internet is for porn afterall. Seriously folks, just look it up instead of forcing your players to endure your fetish.
DM in the Drow story is a true gigachad. Tried to reason with the party who were planning something stupid but eventually just gave up and gave DM fiat to the only player who wasn't being an asshole. As a DM you need to give benefit of the doubt but you also need to know when it's time to pull the proverbial trigger.
the kobold turning into a dragonborn through magical tattoos is brilliant and i am definitely stealing that concept (i am a sucker for dragon shifters)
With the intro story, considering how many people would take anything that isn't a blatant no as "Oh yeah, they're definitely into this", hinting at your discomfort is doing zero work, especially when it's already shown to be ineffective. They'd do better just telling the bard in no uncertain terms to quit it and if the bard takes it unfavourably or ignores them, take it to the DM and see if the bard can get booted after no improvement. You shouldn't have to put probably rocking the boat before your own comfort.
Oof, second story reminds me of my group. Two of our players aren't exactly sharp, and if they have deemed someone as evil next to nothing can change their mind. A third guy in the group got marked as the bad guy for some minor reason and after that, anything he did was seen as further proof. Like he had to stop using invisibility, in and out of combat, because it was "slippery behavior" etc. The kicker was that my character was genuinely evil but they didn't notice before I killed a king we'd been working with for over a year (IRL time) and followed it up by releasing a hoard of demons that could destroy the whole continent, FOR THE SECOND TIME.
I have a heroic bard. He doesn’t flirt with anyone. He’s all about chivalry. Bards don’t have to be sexual and until Critical Roll I had never heard of that archetype. Yeah I’ve seen the spoony bars and the deadbeat dad bard but that’s just traveling men stuff.
Concerning the "nice guy"/simp, I have encountered similar people in online sessions. Man, it SUCKS. Unfortunately, you can't be subtle or "nice" with those types either, and most of the time I see those people ultimately get ousted from the game because nobody has fun with them around. I've also been on the other side where I failed to read the room/table and made a comment in-character during a Vampire: the Masquerade game that made the other players and the ST uncomfortable and they took some time before the next session to talk to me about it. It was awkward and uncomfortable, and I explained that I had played with another group where making comments about some really dark stuff in-game was frequent, so I associated the game with that kind of mindset. The bottom line, however, was that I had made the rest of the players uncomfortable and they talked to me, I apologized, and refrained from doing it again. Slip ups happen, be mature about it.
I've played a (video) game where the main character has a "Potency" stat that tracks how many sex partners he's had. High potency grants pseudomagical powers of magic resistance and intimidation. But this game is porn from the get-go, so it kinda works. :) Although, now I think of it, wasn't there a TTRPG where sex was LITERALLY a level-up? Some Evangelion-style mecha game where you had Intimacy stats with your party members that made you more powerful, but drama in high-intimacy relationships caused emotional breakdowns in the middle of combat and other bad stuff?
Okay, here we go. Intro: The only real problem I have here is when OP said she HINTED to the guy he was making her uncomfortable. Never hint. No one gets hints. Hints are open to interpretation, and people always interpret them to be the most favorable to themselves. If someone is making you uncomfortable, TELL them. Never hint. Starting off Light: This is one of the reasons I'm a big fan of the "yeah, that's weird" method. This DM clearly wanted the session to go a specific way and did NOT handle it well when his players gave him some very fair criticism (though I wasn't there, it may have been delivered much less than fairly, I don't know). Usually if something happens and my players notice the discrepancy, I'll say "Yeah, you're right, his brain bomb shouldn't have gone off. Weird." Even if I have no idea how to fix it, that gives me a week to figure something out, and it makes it seem like I'm this master planner when I'm really BSing my way through nearly half of the game. The Party Tried to Kill Me: That seems a good enough way for the DM to handle it, but I go a step further. I simply state that non-consensual PVP is not allowed at my table. If a player attack, uses a skill against, casts a spell against, or in any way acts against another player, I simply ask the other player what happens. There is no roll, the attacked player just becomes DM for a moment. Were I in the position here of DM, I'd probably just call a giant time out and ask the other players just what the hell they think they're doing. If they told me of their plans beforehand, I would just straight tell them no, that's not going to happen, we're not having the party conspiring to kill one of its own members and they need to find a way to integrate this half-drow with them. Full stop. I mean, that's a hard skill to learn, and I don't expect everyone to be able to do this, but I've been playing since 1995, my tolerance for BS is pretty low nowadays. Stealing the DM's Job: I've got nothing. The players and DM in question did exactly the right thing. They confronted Sky in person about his behavior multiple times, kept in communication with each other, and gave him the boot (which is never fun) once it was clear the issues weren't getting resolved. Nicely done, gents. Our First FEMCEL: It always sucks when it's the DM doing this kind of crap. This is the reason why I have a hard rule in my games that I will NOT take away a characters powers arbitrarily, and sex is not really a part of my games. It's a HARD fade to black if someone wants to do that kind of thing. Other than that, Yeah, good on OP for getting himself out of that situation. Also, kobold sex? Gross.
I LOVE playing bards, never has one of them ever just slept around with anyone NPC or PC. Bards are musicians, performers, and actors, just because some people play them as an excuse to be overtly sexual doesn't mean they must be that way, that says more about the player than it does about the class. It's like thinking barbarians MUST be angry, wizards MUST be snobby, and paladins MUST be lawful-stupid. If the way a character is being played ruins the game experience for the rest of the party the offending player needs to stop and not make excuses like "This is just how my character is."
Man I hate overly zealous paladin players. "Shut up, Turalyon, you're being a problem" is a common phrase among my regulars whenever a random shows up and starts playing like that. On another note, a barbarian who earns their rages through kills instead of getting points from resting is a really cool idea, just remove the horny stuff and you'd have an interesting barbarian variant
I started playing a bard, I am a jolly halfling bard who simply wants to sing songs. I have ensured peace between me, a very angry and rightfully so Santa Claus, and a frankenstein's monster like creature. I do NOT flirt with everything I see.
The one where the party actually planned to kill op for basically no reason tells me these guys were just waiting to bully him through the whole campaign, even if op's PC had like the right features to make him an enemy, these guys were already pretty mean op and his PC. Thank God DM was on op's side.
Intro: Another horny player with a horny bard making a crush uncomfortable. 1st story: Such an awful railroad with a salty finish. At least the party knew to call the DM out and end that campaign. 2nd story: I am very impressed by the Rogue surviving and even more with the DM actually stepping in to punish the party members. Yet another paladin problem player. 3rd story: Such a shame to see a good idea of integrating players into their character's backstory get twisted into stealing DM authority. 4th story: Pretty sure there've been "femcels" before this on the channel whether this was a female DM's incel behaviour, trolling, or something else. OP's character sounds like a neat idea for a Rune Knight.
On the intro story, had a guy get really flirty with me, which was several kinds of creepy because he was fifteen at the time and I was twenty-eight, and I'm pretty sure he knew that, but also, he was brand new to the group, so no prior knowledge of him either. My character rejected his advances, over and over again, and because she was a shapeshifter could also make herself super ugly to try and scare him off, and yet he still persisted, after my character pulled a gun on his character no less! At which point I messaged him privately saying this was not fun, to cut it out or I wasn't going to play with him, which quite likely would have pulled half the party from the game as well. On the last story, don't bring sex to the table unless you know people are cool with it, just full stop. My friends and I can get pretty sexual, but we keep that off the table, others likely know who's hooking up with whom, but the most on the table time it gets is announcing sleeping arrangements.
The player just making up lore 'facts' off the top of their head reminds me of a game I had where one player did the exact same thing. In my case the problem with their 'facts' was that they not only contradicted my lore, they also contradicted the canon lore for the setting itself and some of the mechanics by which undead work. (Zombies do not rot in most D&D settings, they're more dry and leathery [Which is why they get an AC bonus and are slow even when the corpse you make them from is completely intact and well preserved], and can't biodegrade because of the negative energy that sustains them. He arbitrarily claimed that undead skeletons are created when zombies get old and the flesh just falls off, rather than being a completely seperate type of animated corpse, which in and of itself wouldn't bother me... but he said it about corpses that were actively rotting to show that they *WERE NOT* zombies specifically, almost making the party prepare for the wrong kind of enemy, which would have gotten them killed). That's right, I put a factoid inside of my factoid, deal with it.
The anti drow party shoulda been made horrible grisly example of. they went in conspiring against a single other player and bent clear communication to their own ends. all should have died in horrible and unavoidable ways Lady of Pain style. Also, calling some on a sniveling fuck for taking away your DM description powers, absolutely supreme.
The group that went against the player with the drow is awful, I'm happy the DM helped player. He should have stepped in sooner but at least he helped.
If the player wanted to try and get back to the Fey wild due to the mothers birthday, I would have probably said as the gm "Okay, then your character would be going alone."
I was playing in a run of the dungeon of the mad mage, and our paladin has asked to attack sleeping NPC'S due to magic means that were locked up, has let 3 people die opting to attack rather than revive a fallen player, and tries to extort or rhreaten every single NPC
With that half-drow and the rest of the party being idiots thing. Had it gone the other way and their rogue died, the only logical response other than walking away from the table would have been to roll the next character as a 8 int, 8 cha barbarian whose is dense as a brick and incapable of reading the room who also has a quirk of oversharing....everything. Just imagine that party reacting to a barbarian loudly shouting about his latest bowl movements and any other sort of embarrassing moments the other players have been having in character to every npc they meet.
So many of these stories seem like points where I as a player would refuse to continue participating. The 4v1 party betrayal is a prime example of a point where you shouldn't continue playing until the above table issue is resolved. Also if I was a GM and that was happening I'd just say no. Yes you should ensure your players have agency, but there should be limits to what you permit your players to do.
I've literally never even played a bard that flirted with anything. They were all already taken or totally disinterested. I actually never even knew the horny bard was a thing until coming into contact with players online 2 complete editions later. I actually thought it was a new generation of players thing at first. Lol.
Same, bards in my group are always been either about party for the fun of it and either were too focused on beer to consider flirting or just the ramantic shy one with idealised idea of loved that prevented from flirting
The EDITING in this video is *chef's kiss* Regarding bards: While there's so many way to play a bard, some archetypes just fall into horny-bard easier than others. I'm not immune to this, though to be fair, my glamour bard is more "horny for pay" and sees it as a business transaction instead of something hedonistic. My valor bard is an uptight bodyguard semi-obsessed with maintaining HONOR. My eloquence bard is more likely to give you motherly life advice, then passive aggressively add "Or not, I'm not your mother," at the end. And my creations bard is a retired Children's Show Host and is a 4-time divorcee and 1-time widow (accidental death, ignore the life insurance claim she made.)
I always get frustrated at the whole “It’s the bard’s thing to flirt with everything” because isn’t the main factor for a bard is to be an entertainer? (Usually musical but can be other avenues). Like did people forget that ANY class has the capacity to be the “flirty” type. I know it’s a meme but it should just be treated as A MEME. And a meme (no matter what it is) should not have that much power to where people think it’s an actual thing to be believed in (unless it’s universally positive) I legit made a bard character who’s Demi-sexual mostly out of SPITE because of how tired I am of this stereotype. As someone who loves bards, it gets diminishing that bards often gets watered down to “the class that flirts with things”. And I’m not saying no one should play a bard as that ever, I’m just saying that a bard should be seen as more than “the flirty class”.
Even IF you misinterpreted that last gasp to mean "Drow" why would you think it meant the other player who had just helped kill that enemy. That the enemy was hired by the Drow in the party, that was trying to kill him, and he didn't say anything then, only in his last breath. I'd wonder where the "Why are you attacking me, I did as you asked". It's like being told that the big bad that hired the baddy was an elf so you assume that it must be the half elf character in your party. It was a human, Kill the Paladin.
"that's my job you sniveling fuck" I am going to ride the high of suddenly laughing heartily out loud for days. This line was unexpected and fucking hilarious.
Playing a bard doesn’t mean someone HAS to flirt/bang everything that breathes. I play a bard right now and have flirted with all of 1 NPC which failed because it was just a situation where no matter what it was not gonna succeed. Hornet bards is just so played out it’s pathetic.
The DM in the story with drow rogue shouldn't have let the entire party exclude/plot against one PC like that in the first place! I can sympathize with the DM's hesitance if they were shy/non-confrontational, but that situation could have easily been avoided. I hope the toxic party members learn from their poor behavior and realize their mistakes - even though the DM blundered imo the party members ultimately were the ones in the wrong here.
Intro: in the right, no D&D is better than bad D&D and being made uncomfortable is bad D&D, and i have played a horny charecter before, several (Paladin of Vengence, a couple of rouges) but no means no is sacrosanct to them, and i made one a Johny Bravo. Introstory: aww, 40k. The GM is being needlessly difficult. I guess in the 41st century. There is only bad GMs Second story: Oh, this group are monsters. There were being murder hobos. The DM was awsome 3rd. Just write a novel. The DM needed to take controle, best friend or not. They are taking the fun of it 4. OP needs an Adult, OP needs an adult.
Its funny a story comes up with players creating lore on the spot cause in my FF Pathfinder game my character (a runaway from a xenophobic kingdom) made an off comment about how a certain cat like race should be extinct cause of his old homes xenophobic ways. The DM rolled with it and made it so theyre race actually moved off to a pocket dimension during a large attack seemingly making in look like they went extinct. Again meant nothing by the comment and it changed everything.
Story 2 It sounded like this group had it out for OP and just kill off Op’s character. The DM should have never let OP play drow-but I am glad they did step in and kicked out the problem party.
If the player wants to play a half-drow, and it doesn't break the lore of the campaign, they should be allowed to do so, and if the other players or their characters have issue with it, it should be stated and discussed beforehand, rather than the players conspiring to kill another character because the characters don't like drow rogues. If it had been properly discussed beforehand, it could have been a great RP moment to have them talk it out in character and become closer for it.
If the group wasn't comprised of stubborn losers, they coupd have had wonderful character building moments learning that "Not all Drow/Rouges/Dark Magic users are bad" and building a friendship with their new half-Drow buddy.
I wouldn't think it's the PC's race at fault here but rather none of the other players saying they have backstory reasons to neither trust drow or rogues bc it still came off as all of them save for DM targeting this person's character for no reason. Though the most likely reason is the other players didn't want OP to be playing and whether or not they had a drow rogue wouldn't change how they got treated.
That party in the 4 on 1 story seemed more like they were chaotically stupid aligned. While their role playing wasn’t bad, they had In story reasons for their initial dislike of OP’s character, they definitely took it to a personal level after the OP dropped his weapons. That could’ve been a perfect time for some good RP but nope, the stupid prevailed and now those 4 are out on their butts!
relating to the 3rd story, in my game I don't mind if my players throw in some last lore, (my homebrew world is vast and has deep lore), just don't flat out re wright a chunk of it for no reason, and if you do have reason make it so it can be woven into the history. EG: my story, so the City was held by the Azure Oder for 300 years before it was taken, by the forces of Bahamut, (that's my version), don't say, the city never returned to Bahamut and is still under the command of the Oder, some 5,000 years later. because your character is a Cleric of Tiamat and received a vision of the truth in a dream. what could work would be, the forces of Bahamut took the city only after the War of the Dragon finished, I know this is a long-winded way of saying, if your players add more lore to your world, that's not always a bad thing just as long as it doesn't contradict your Lore too much.
"just because your thing isn't as bad as other things, doesn't mean it's not bad" I had a similar issue once I am not terribly fond of physical contact outside of people I'm really close with, like family or crushes, and one of my dnd character I gave a similar trait I guess I got a bit too immersed because it would bother me immensely whenever the fighter who my char didn't get along with literally pushed her around or just put her hand on my char's shoulder to make her shut up (felt kinda threathening, but was more meant as a friendly warning from their side I think, since my char would always be a bit reckless beforehand) well, long story short I didn't want to snap at them even in character because I didn't want to ruin the mood or anything like that and because they didn't mean anything bad with it, so I just bottled it up but I vented to a friend a bit about it and she convinced me to just roleplay it out when it's an actual part of my character, or else it will never stop so soon after that advice I did snap at the fighter in character when her char touched mine again and from then on I also didn't hold back with npcs - one time a pc retired and hugged everyone good bye, so I said that my char doesn't look happy but tolerates it and later on when I was flirting with a barkeep he touched my hands or something and I instantly got feisty, then with borders clearly defined we went back to friendly banter and drinks actually I give many of my characters that trait that they don't like physical contact when it fits their background Far traveller for example has a suggested personality trait that's "I have different ideas about personal space than others" or something along those lines so that's usually "don't touch them for me" the character from the story though was a criminal and had that trait simply because I made her paranoid af, with trust issues and some literal scars from a fight she once had when her family (gang) got attacked One character who has the trait has a special spin to it though, it's not that they don't like physical contact but instead they absolutely despise telepathy and other mind tricks being initiated against them from anyone else but their kraken master (warlock) because of backstory reasons
My most recent character concept is a Frost Sorcerer that accidentally froze her parents to death as a pre-teen and as a result has a lot of self-loathing to deal with as well as a near phobia of people touching her for fear of accidentally killing them.
And here I though the part 2 of party try to the kill Op story be the highlight been the femcel came and stole that by a landslide . She really turned OP’s cool rage story concept into either kill bandits or go to a brothel . My theory is dm had a crush and was using game to express feelings , trolling or idk .
Player just adding lore into the game… funnily enough I’ve seen a game use that as an actual mechanic without yanking control away from the GM. Exalted 3rd Edition has a way to use the Lore skill (I can’t remember the name of this use, annoyingly) where you can try to just introduce a fact. You have to make a lore check and the difficulty is determined by how plausible the GM thinks it’d be. Like if you were trying to escape pursuit in a city someone could introduce the idea that there’s a big pop-up market that happens every two weeks and just happens to be on today and is only a couple blocks away with crowds big enough to lose their pursuers in.
It's literally called 'Introduce Fact', and it's GREAT for communal setting-building, but it works best because even if you do introduce a fact, it still needs the Storyteller to sign off on it, and if there's a reason it doesn't click, then you get a chance to find a compromise.
"Ive had enough, kill them." Is a pretty terrifying thing for someone to say even if it's just about actions in a game.
Ah the classic, "you mean their characters right?... right?"
“Do it Anakin. Kill him.”
@@TheMightyBattleSquid why not both?
@@TheMightyBattleSquid "I won't go to real jail for imaginary characters"
Gigachad DM
"Is ThAT DaRK mAgIC!?"
It's a spell literally almost every low-level spell-caster has access to. Man those players were LOOKING for excuses to PvP for... no damn reason? Glad the GM booted them and sided with the member being targeted.
Almost funny how vague the "dark magic" the Paladin hates is. Nothing like necromancy, warlock patrons, sorcerer origins, or anything that can actually be identified to anyone else.
@@ArcCaravan Right? Like, these guys were looking for excuses to be dicks. I bet they marched out "Its what my character would do" in the private chats with the DM.
"Well, it's a spell that makes the surrounding environment dark, so ... yes, I guess you could call it 'dark magic'."
@@robertbryant4669 it's dark magic in a literal sense.
"I thought you were a master of the dark arts."
"I am! I made it so nobody can see!"
Its also the race spell of tieflings. Asmodues or something is the subrace that has it. Honestly i feel like mentioning that would add to their racism.
Mad respect to the DM who didn't allow the party to kill the Rouge just for being half drow. Sad to see it went bad but I'm glad that the DM got sick and tired of the horrible mistreatment at the rogue for being a rogue and for being half drow. Shame on the humans to make the wood elf or eladrin bard turn on the rogue. Irony that the rogue "100% didn't tell (them) everything" was incorrect since the rogue was honest to the party so they'd trust them. It's hilarious that the party gangs up on the rogue and the DM was like "I've had enough, Rogue, kill" and was actively on the Rogue's side. Props to them
I feel less inclined to pity the Bard since he still agreed to gang up on OP and nothing hinted they regretted it. I'm guessing they were the only one without some excuse in-game to join besides "I felt like it".
@@ArcCaravan Valid.
The whole party trying to kill the Drow player, may they never play a game again.
awful people
If you're gonna lay a curse on 'em, hit 'em full force. May they schedule every game and only find out they can't play at the last second.
@@gelusvenn5063 oy.
Oh we're cursing people??? May the whole party who tried to kill the Drow always miss one sock, may their shoes be filled with the piss of their pets and if they don't have any, may their houses have rat infestations. May everyone's schedules be interfered by major inconveniences. And may their sleep be deprived of restfulness.
@Mébh “DreamWitch_ttv” may they step on a lego every single morning, and stub their pinky toe on their bed frame every single night.
The Party Tried to Kill Me: I feel like the problem here was that, rather than resolving their issues with OP face-to-face, the rest of the group instead conspired behind OP's back, even attempting to rope DM into their conspiracy. They apparently made up their minds to dislike OP on sight, and it was clear that no amount of trust building exercises would win them over.
the worst thing is that it could've been resolved by them just asking "hey is your character actually evil?" out of character. sure it may be "meta gaming" to some but i think it would have been a fair thing to just ask outright
@@Kevinblue035 No, they knew they weren't evil. Either they are really dumb/narrow minded or they were using the drow thing as some lame excuse to bully cause it was established several times he was a half-drow and told the party everything. This was quite clearly some stupid "bUt itS wUt mY cARactOr wOoD dEw" situation. The facr they were gone after even proves how petty they were and this was not based on anything but disliking OP for some reason
That drow sounds like more of a team player than any Paladin I've ever made.
Asexual crispy saying “sex is the real level up” is the energy I needed.
fr, the sudden closeup of crispy as he says it just makes it funnier
Is he actually asexual? I know OSPRed is asexual through TvTropes...
@@chee.rah.monurB yep, aroace; thats why he has the ace flag as a pin on his endscreen art
@@keybladewizard49 Oh,I don't actually stick around for that long. Not everything's a Marvel movie,if the video's ending,then it's ending,Time to watch a different one.
@@chee.rah.monurB He mentions it a lot in his videos too
honestly i feel bad for mr.kobold because the idea of him being insecure about being a kobold and losing his powers to transform into a buff sexy dragonborn would have been a great way to kick off a character arc about learning to accept who he is and love himself the way he is and not having to be super macho all the time and raging at the drop of a hat, but instead the GM had to make it a weird excuse to force sex scenes
In this case it could've been all about conquering his insecurities amd learning better how to deal with them, even though they may still sometimes appear.
I have the feeling GM is my "kind" of person, but she forgot that such "plots" belong in the forbiden lenny face folder and not in a campaign.
I think the dm either had a fetish for lizard people or she had a crush on the PC. It's too weird and specific about impregnation.
@@affarinoxa I think its more the typical monster and woman thing, but could ended in that to. Also GM crushing on PC is a probability.
Also maybe it had to do with the homebrew, but RAW he shouldn't even be able to have sex while raging, because he has to attack or receive damage each round or the rage ends. (Or did DM force BDSM as well?)
The party trying to kill the rogue story is an oldie but a damn good one. 'I've have enough, kill them.' Ah, yes. Good. KEEL. Sure, you could say 'DM should have stopped this sooner' or 'OP should have spoken to the DM' but then...the resolution wouldn't have been this sweet.
Definitely a better ending than expected. Surviving a 4v1, DM ending the fight in the solo player's favor, and kicking the other players from the campaign.
Story 1
Oh woooow. DM puts the group into a hard battle, has a temper tantrum when the players complains, and then doesn’t give them their hard earned rewards. I would leave too.
Especially since he ignored all player successes and just auto failed them, even when the dude rolled a 1 on a d100, which is the best roll you could possibly get for that game. Like, if you don't want them to succeed, don't have them roll, because that just gives the illusion of possible success. At the same time, for something like that, you should make it possible to succeed, because it gives player interaction with the story, rather than just a railroad. And then to give BS excuses about why they failed when they should have succeeded. "Oh, yes you got the highest roll you could have gotten, and, out of anyone here, should know if these guys are with the group you work for or not, but since they're wearing uniforms, you still think they are with the group, even though they aren't." Or "Even though you succeeded on your medical treatment of the guy that was uninjured and magically dying for no reason, you somehow triggered a bomb in his head that is nowhere near where you were treating and his head explodes and he dies."
I honestly thought the half dragon was saying "Dra...gon" not whatever the name of the Sorcerer's father was. That group were being d*cks. Glad the DM handled it after that (probably should have warned OP about the other players plans, even if it was cryptically).
Flirting with everything is not a bard thing or exlusive to a bard; it's one of the worst attributes I've heard about a class in general besides lawful stupid paladins and rogues' kleptomania.
An unfortunately common stereotype.
Oh god, I was doing chores while listening to this video and froze when I realized you started reading my story (Stole The DM's Job). I swear that's just so surreal
I have to completely agree with you about dealing with abuse like that. I may have been the start of ending that chokehold on the DM, but everyone else helped when they realized and I told them that things weren't going okay, or right. Don't ever hesitate to ask someone if they're alright if you even *think* they're in an abusive situation; you never know when you reaching out might just get the ball rolling and get them somewhere happier and safer.
As for Sky and Elise... Something funny about him getting booted? Elise's disappearance did absolutely nothing to the plot. We simply continued. Neither her nor her family left any impact at ALL and the DM is now happily using the Feywild in incredible ways in our campaign. I always find it quite funny that for all hers and Sky's attention hogging, Elise didn't really matter to the world in the end
I'd have loved to been an audience in that call when those morons were trying to give justification to the dm why their characters all jumped at the chance to kill OP especially after they'd made the promise of not doing it
i mean judging by the backstories im gonna go out on a limb and just say all their excuses were "but its what my character would do"
@@mrroboshadow more than likely, but I'm sure it'd be quite something bringing up how they made the promise to not and yet they did it anyway
.
. ....
M
Dodge action is highly underrated.
The DM should have stepped in for the rogue much sooner than they did. And those players did force the DM to solve the problem in game rather than out.
It was just a crappy situation all around.
It sounds to me like the players were trying to drive the OP from the game, but the reason is unclear. If the OP had come in with a completely different character, they might have come with some excuse to go after that character, so ditching the half-drow likely would not have solved the underlying problem. This is one story that I would really like to hear from a different point of view, such as the DM or one of the other players. I agree - it is a generally crappy situation, and I hope everyone involved learned some lessons from it.
@@heatherharrison264 That may well be the case Heather. It's hard to know given how those players straight up lied to the DM. So we couldn't in all honesty trust anything said by any one of them.
Having the DM weigh in on it is really the only way to get more to work with as it were.
Honestly, it's just stupid for people to act this way at the table. And pointless.
I wonder if the DM just enjoyed rogue dancing around them too much to intervene sooner.
@@ArcCaravan That's possible.
@@marybdrake1472 yeah like he was gonna step in but watching the party's fruestration build as they wasted their last spells and actions missing every single one of them was just too fun
Suddenly I understand why DMs enjoy killing the families of player characters.
The story with the half drow player getting back up from the DM is the karma I hope for in those situations. That group engineered a vendetta for no good reason.
“They give a bit of an opening too by letting you roleplay a character related to your character’s backstory if you want”
Wow, I’ve never heard of this being done before and I LOVE this idea so much.
Just wanted to say that lol.
pausing to laugh at "i would have confronted him once he took away my precious flower describing thats my job you fuck" keeping this in my pocket. but for real, as someone who had an abusive friend, sometimes it really takes just one person to help untangle such an awful web that others are stuck in. really wish it were me, but at least lesson learned. and good for all of them getting out of there
Dammit, I get excited hearing another Elise in the world-old fashioned name you know-but then my namesake just has to be a brat. Smh
One of my favorite musicians is Elise Trouw! So that’s at least one more.
youtube.com/@elisetrouw
@@CrispysTavern Oh wow! Thanks for the recc Crispy! She’s incredible!
"the whole party tried to kill me"
Man, what a bunch of turds! At least drow player got to play a better game
About story two's Crispy's comment:
I'm in a D&D westmarches server and made a new character, a werewolf.
A friend of mine who is playing a Bloodhunter turned into a werewolf against his will told me:
"Hey. My character haters werewolves and would kill or cure your character so, please let's never make them meet!"
I found that to be refreshing and amazing. Instead of creating drama in the future, he told me why our characters shouldn't interact and how to solve that and, since it's a west-marches, than can easily be solved!
Opener
Definitely speak to the DM.
Just because a bard might be “flirty” does not mean they should be flirting with players if they are uncomfortable.
Story 3
We learned how hard it can be for one person to RP multiple NPC’s in one campaign. Enough so that we asked the DM if we could take the load off their shoulders since we were a text rp.
Sky is being a camera hogging bully who took advantage of the DM’s friendship to be a Mary Sue.
The death penalty to leave Feywild would have been the last straw.
I've had a similar experience to the drow story but it ended really goo. I play dnd mostly with close friends from school so we know each other quite well. I was playing a human fighter-warlock multiclass and the party had a paladin that was very much against demonic magic. Our Backstories were connected that the Kingdom my character came from are basically descendents from his tribe that wanted to live a less religious life.
Whenever my character used his warlock magic the Paladin would get suspicous but my character kept on lying by saying he recieved minor Wizard training in the past. These confrontations never got further than a slap on the wrist and got really fun once my character began gaining more and more from his patron and becoming more greedy. They were constantly having vocal arguments about how the Paladin comes from a backwood tribe and just doesn't know what modern magic looks like. It really added to roleplay in a fun way.
YES!!!!! Intro - Wow definitely advocate for yourself… esp when you’ve told him you don’t feel that way
She didn't advocate for herself, she just kept quiet while he flirted with her and hoped he's "get over it". We also don't know if she said something like "I'm just not into you that way" or something like "you're a really great friend"; two statements that can be perceived to have either the same meaning or very different meanings depending on who hears it. The guy was clearly a total douchebag there, but we need more information if we want to make a judgement call on whether or not it was ENTIRELY his fault.
@@JacobL228 ...no, either option is just as bad. Nobody owes another person sex. The dude is a creep.
@@snorpenbass4196 I agree. I never said she did, and I already referred to the guy as "a douchebag".
@@JacobL228 Pretty sure it was mentioned that she already told the guy before that she isn't interested in a relationship with him.
@@ArcCaravan Yes, but he didn't stop. He was definitely at fault, but she still should have either insisted harder or asked someone else to help her deal with him.
Very good point about the first story. Most groups dont end up having to deal with abuse, bullying or other "toxicity" just bad DMs and/or players
I love ops concise summary of WH40k, especially the Psyker explanation♥
It was kind of jumped over, but the DM also had a character seduce and sexually engage with a character who was under the influence of a spell. That is definitely not a consenting situation. That is SA. I've never had to address that in a game, but if I were a DM and a player wanted to do something like that it would lead to some serious conversations out of game. In game, I would make it clear that the spell would fail. I do not allow charms, etc, to allow characters to do that to each other.
That story was a doozy. I'm glad the player narrating it didn't see, overly traumatised by what went down, but if you were to reverse the genders, I think we might see people reacting much more negatively. It was clear the player was not comfortable with those kinds of interactions, and yet the DM kept forcing it on them, and eventually escalated to outright in-game coercion/assault. That was 100% out of line and completely skeevy. Just because the DM was a woman doesn't make her any less of a creep.
Ok I do love the party turning story, just hearing the DM go "OK, I've had enough of their stupidity. Give em hell." He definitely just was sick of the quartet (or at least trio, since they roped the Bard into their bias) and just decided to use OP as the engine of his karma.
23:30 I did that in a campaign but my character was also a pathological liar so I basically told the DM that my character absolutely had no idea of what he was saying was true or not.
I think more paladin players should get acquainted with Egbert the Careless, the dragonborn paladin.
Story 4
“Sex is the real level up”
Me: Pffft. You owe me a new keyboard!
I agree that having tattoos be this sorta “become someone different” or gain their powers.
Same with being compelled to spill blood to maintain their powers. That is classic “deal with the devil” stuff right there.
Too bad this DM ruined both ideas to make ber weird monster fucker fan fic. Like… gurl, even I am not this blatant about my attractions while I play-that is what fan fiction and following nsfw artists are for. The internet is for porn afterall.
Seriously folks, just look it up instead of forcing your players to endure your fetish.
DM in the Drow story is a true gigachad. Tried to reason with the party who were planning something stupid but eventually just gave up and gave DM fiat to the only player who wasn't being an asshole. As a DM you need to give benefit of the doubt but you also need to know when it's time to pull the proverbial trigger.
I always look forward to seeing your videos 🙂
Thanks Amy appreciate it!
The only reason I would ever leave a campaign is drama. Too old to want to deal with drama .
the kobold turning into a dragonborn through magical tattoos is brilliant and i am definitely stealing that concept (i am a sucker for dragon shifters)
With the intro story, considering how many people would take anything that isn't a blatant no as "Oh yeah, they're definitely into this", hinting at your discomfort is doing zero work, especially when it's already shown to be ineffective. They'd do better just telling the bard in no uncertain terms to quit it and if the bard takes it unfavourably or ignores them, take it to the DM and see if the bard can get booted after no improvement. You shouldn't have to put probably rocking the boat before your own comfort.
I was rooting so hard for that Rogue. GG to them and the DM!
That clip where you showed that clip from the xp to level 3 video made me laugh
Specifically, Psykers are Psionics who draw power through Hyperspace, which is *also* Hell.
The DM was stolen! Call the town guard!
Also, still cool art of yourself and your rat persona.
intro story: flirting with everyone is kinda a bards thing
Me: plays an aroace bard
"I don't like american froot"
Bacon flavored apple with a shotgun: And I took that personally.
"--takes away my precious flower describing. That's MY job, ya sniveling F---" /dead. 🤣🤣🤣
The Best Crisp Rat.
I prefer Fried Mouse
Drow had the good ending
But i like good endings
Oof, second story reminds me of my group. Two of our players aren't exactly sharp, and if they have deemed someone as evil next to nothing can change their mind. A third guy in the group got marked as the bad guy for some minor reason and after that, anything he did was seen as further proof. Like he had to stop using invisibility, in and out of combat, because it was "slippery behavior" etc. The kicker was that my character was genuinely evil but they didn't notice before I killed a king we'd been working with for over a year (IRL time) and followed it up by releasing a hoard of demons that could destroy the whole continent, FOR THE SECOND TIME.
I have a heroic bard. He doesn’t flirt with anyone. He’s all about chivalry. Bards don’t have to be sexual and until Critical Roll I had never heard of that archetype. Yeah I’ve seen the spoony bars and the deadbeat dad bard but that’s just traveling men stuff.
Concerning the "nice guy"/simp, I have encountered similar people in online sessions. Man, it SUCKS. Unfortunately, you can't be subtle or "nice" with those types either, and most of the time I see those people ultimately get ousted from the game because nobody has fun with them around. I've also been on the other side where I failed to read the room/table and made a comment in-character during a Vampire: the Masquerade game that made the other players and the ST uncomfortable and they took some time before the next session to talk to me about it. It was awkward and uncomfortable, and I explained that I had played with another group where making comments about some really dark stuff in-game was frequent, so I associated the game with that kind of mindset. The bottom line, however, was that I had made the rest of the players uncomfortable and they talked to me, I apologized, and refrained from doing it again. Slip ups happen, be mature about it.
you dont mess with crispy describing flowers
I've played a (video) game where the main character has a "Potency" stat that tracks how many sex partners he's had. High potency grants pseudomagical powers of magic resistance and intimidation. But this game is porn from the get-go, so it kinda works. :)
Although, now I think of it, wasn't there a TTRPG where sex was LITERALLY a level-up? Some Evangelion-style mecha game where you had Intimacy stats with your party members that made you more powerful, but drama in high-intimacy relationships caused emotional breakdowns in the middle of combat and other bad stuff?
Yeah, I’ve heard of it! I think it’s called Bliss Stage.
Okay, here we go.
Intro: The only real problem I have here is when OP said she HINTED to the guy he was making her uncomfortable. Never hint. No one gets hints. Hints are open to interpretation, and people always interpret them to be the most favorable to themselves. If someone is making you uncomfortable, TELL them. Never hint.
Starting off Light: This is one of the reasons I'm a big fan of the "yeah, that's weird" method. This DM clearly wanted the session to go a specific way and did NOT handle it well when his players gave him some very fair criticism (though I wasn't there, it may have been delivered much less than fairly, I don't know). Usually if something happens and my players notice the discrepancy, I'll say "Yeah, you're right, his brain bomb shouldn't have gone off. Weird." Even if I have no idea how to fix it, that gives me a week to figure something out, and it makes it seem like I'm this master planner when I'm really BSing my way through nearly half of the game.
The Party Tried to Kill Me: That seems a good enough way for the DM to handle it, but I go a step further. I simply state that non-consensual PVP is not allowed at my table. If a player attack, uses a skill against, casts a spell against, or in any way acts against another player, I simply ask the other player what happens. There is no roll, the attacked player just becomes DM for a moment. Were I in the position here of DM, I'd probably just call a giant time out and ask the other players just what the hell they think they're doing. If they told me of their plans beforehand, I would just straight tell them no, that's not going to happen, we're not having the party conspiring to kill one of its own members and they need to find a way to integrate this half-drow with them. Full stop. I mean, that's a hard skill to learn, and I don't expect everyone to be able to do this, but I've been playing since 1995, my tolerance for BS is pretty low nowadays.
Stealing the DM's Job: I've got nothing. The players and DM in question did exactly the right thing. They confronted Sky in person about his behavior multiple times, kept in communication with each other, and gave him the boot (which is never fun) once it was clear the issues weren't getting resolved. Nicely done, gents.
Our First FEMCEL: It always sucks when it's the DM doing this kind of crap. This is the reason why I have a hard rule in my games that I will NOT take away a characters powers arbitrarily, and sex is not really a part of my games. It's a HARD fade to black if someone wants to do that kind of thing. Other than that, Yeah, good on OP for getting himself out of that situation. Also, kobold sex? Gross.
"I've had enough. Kill them."
Ok I didn't think this was the mafia
I LOVE playing bards, never has one of them ever just slept around with anyone NPC or PC. Bards are musicians, performers, and actors, just because some people play them as an excuse to be overtly sexual doesn't mean they must be that way, that says more about the player than it does about the class. It's like thinking barbarians MUST be angry, wizards MUST be snobby, and paladins MUST be lawful-stupid. If the way a character is being played ruins the game experience for the rest of the party the offending player needs to stop and not make excuses like "This is just how my character is."
The last story, Kobold dragon marked subrace.
Man I hate overly zealous paladin players. "Shut up, Turalyon, you're being a problem" is a common phrase among my regulars whenever a random shows up and starts playing like that.
On another note, a barbarian who earns their rages through kills instead of getting points from resting is a really cool idea, just remove the horny stuff and you'd have an interesting barbarian variant
I started playing a bard, I am a jolly halfling bard who simply wants to sing songs. I have ensured peace between me, a very angry and rightfully so Santa Claus, and a frankenstein's monster like creature. I do NOT flirt with everything I see.
The one where the party actually planned to kill op for basically no reason tells me these guys were just waiting to bully him through the whole campaign, even if op's PC had like the right features to make him an enemy, these guys were already pretty mean op and his PC. Thank God DM was on op's side.
I dunno that Kobold thing sounds fun. Having every girl hit on you is awesome lol.
Intro: Another horny player with a horny bard making a crush uncomfortable.
1st story: Such an awful railroad with a salty finish. At least the party knew to call the DM out and end that campaign.
2nd story: I am very impressed by the Rogue surviving and even more with the DM actually stepping in to punish the party members. Yet another paladin problem player.
3rd story: Such a shame to see a good idea of integrating players into their character's backstory get twisted into stealing DM authority.
4th story: Pretty sure there've been "femcels" before this on the channel whether this was a female DM's incel behaviour, trolling, or something else. OP's character sounds like a neat idea for a Rune Knight.
40k isn't cyberpunk. It's fantasypunk. The technology is a thin veneer painted over the Fantasy of the game.
Even the technology runs on magi- I mean Machine Spirits.
Eh, could argue cyberpunk in spirit than in technology. Granted the other descriptions could have covered that.
On the intro story, had a guy get really flirty with me, which was several kinds of creepy because he was fifteen at the time and I was twenty-eight, and I'm pretty sure he knew that, but also, he was brand new to the group, so no prior knowledge of him either. My character rejected his advances, over and over again, and because she was a shapeshifter could also make herself super ugly to try and scare him off, and yet he still persisted, after my character pulled a gun on his character no less! At which point I messaged him privately saying this was not fun, to cut it out or I wasn't going to play with him, which quite likely would have pulled half the party from the game as well.
On the last story, don't bring sex to the table unless you know people are cool with it, just full stop. My friends and I can get pretty sexual, but we keep that off the table, others likely know who's hooking up with whom, but the most on the table time it gets is announcing sleeping arrangements.
The player just making up lore 'facts' off the top of their head reminds me of a game I had where one player did the exact same thing. In my case the problem with their 'facts' was that they not only contradicted my lore, they also contradicted the canon lore for the setting itself and some of the mechanics by which undead work. (Zombies do not rot in most D&D settings, they're more dry and leathery [Which is why they get an AC bonus and are slow even when the corpse you make them from is completely intact and well preserved], and can't biodegrade because of the negative energy that sustains them. He arbitrarily claimed that undead skeletons are created when zombies get old and the flesh just falls off, rather than being a completely seperate type of animated corpse, which in and of itself wouldn't bother me... but he said it about corpses that were actively rotting to show that they *WERE NOT* zombies specifically, almost making the party prepare for the wrong kind of enemy, which would have gotten them killed). That's right, I put a factoid inside of my factoid, deal with it.
The anti drow party shoulda been made horrible grisly example of. they went in conspiring against a single other player and bent clear communication to their own ends. all should have died in horrible and unavoidable ways Lady of Pain style.
Also, calling some on a sniveling fuck for taking away your DM description powers, absolutely supreme.
The group that went against the player with the drow is awful, I'm happy the DM helped player. He should have stepped in sooner but at least he helped.
If the player wanted to try and get back to the Fey wild due to the mothers birthday, I would have probably said as the gm "Okay, then your character would be going alone."
the XP to Level 3 fade-in killed me, i love this community
CRISPY!!!!! 😎
I was playing in a run of the dungeon of the mad mage, and our paladin has asked to attack sleeping NPC'S due to magic means that were locked up, has let 3 people die opting to attack rather than revive a fallen player, and tries to extort or rhreaten every single NPC
With that half-drow and the rest of the party being idiots thing. Had it gone the other way and their rogue died, the only logical response other than walking away from the table would have been to roll the next character as a 8 int, 8 cha barbarian whose is dense as a brick and incapable of reading the room who also has a quirk of oversharing....everything. Just imagine that party reacting to a barbarian loudly shouting about his latest bowl movements and any other sort of embarrassing moments the other players have been having in character to every npc they meet.
So many of these stories seem like points where I as a player would refuse to continue participating. The 4v1 party betrayal is a prime example of a point where you shouldn't continue playing until the above table issue is resolved.
Also if I was a GM and that was happening I'd just say no. Yes you should ensure your players have agency, but there should be limits to what you permit your players to do.
I've literally never even played a bard that flirted with anything. They were all already taken or totally disinterested. I actually never even knew the horny bard was a thing until coming into contact with players online 2 complete editions later. I actually thought it was a new generation of players thing at first. Lol.
Same, bards in my group are always been either about party for the fun of it and either were too focused on beer to consider flirting or just the ramantic shy one with idealised idea of loved that prevented from flirting
One of my biggest rules for DND in general is PVP both sides have to consent
opening story sounds like someone cant take a joke
Yeah, I'm totally stealing that kobold idea
The EDITING in this video is *chef's kiss*
Regarding bards: While there's so many way to play a bard, some archetypes just fall into horny-bard easier than others. I'm not immune to this, though to be fair, my glamour bard is more "horny for pay" and sees it as a business transaction instead of something hedonistic. My valor bard is an uptight bodyguard semi-obsessed with maintaining HONOR. My eloquence bard is more likely to give you motherly life advice, then passive aggressively add "Or not, I'm not your mother," at the end. And my creations bard is a retired Children's Show Host and is a 4-time divorcee and 1-time widow (accidental death, ignore the life insurance claim she made.)
I always get frustrated at the whole “It’s the bard’s thing to flirt with everything” because isn’t the main factor for a bard is to be an entertainer? (Usually musical but can be other avenues). Like did people forget that ANY class has the capacity to be the “flirty”
type. I know it’s a meme but it should just be treated as A MEME. And a meme (no matter what it is) should not have that much power to where people think it’s an actual thing to be believed in (unless it’s universally positive)
I legit made a bard character who’s Demi-sexual mostly out of SPITE because of how tired I am of this stereotype. As someone who loves bards, it gets diminishing that bards often gets watered down to “the class that flirts with things”. And I’m not saying no one should play a bard as that ever, I’m just saying that a bard should be seen as more than “the flirty class”.
the second story is the exact reason why drow should be pronounced like "crow" or "know" instead
22:02 Crispy's MVGM move
Even IF you misinterpreted that last gasp to mean "Drow" why would you think it meant the other player who had just helped kill that enemy. That the enemy was hired by the Drow in the party, that was trying to kill him, and he didn't say anything then, only in his last breath. I'd wonder where the "Why are you attacking me, I did as you asked". It's like being told that the big bad that hired the baddy was an elf so you assume that it must be the half elf character in your party. It was a human, Kill the Paladin.
"I've had enough, kill them."
1:15 yeahhhh sometime people get "uncomfortable" when they after a little dramma and clout
"that's my job you sniveling fuck"
I am going to ride the high of suddenly laughing heartily out loud for days. This line was unexpected and fucking hilarious.
Playing a bard doesn’t mean someone HAS to flirt/bang everything that breathes. I play a bard right now and have flirted with all of 1 NPC which failed because it was just a situation where no matter what it was not gonna succeed. Hornet bards is just so played out it’s pathetic.
15:33 I live for that line.
The DM in the story with drow rogue shouldn't have let the entire party exclude/plot against one PC like that in the first place! I can sympathize with the DM's hesitance if they were shy/non-confrontational, but that situation could have easily been avoided. I hope the toxic party members learn from their poor behavior and realize their mistakes - even though the DM blundered imo the party members ultimately were the ones in the wrong here.
Intro: in the right, no D&D is better than bad D&D and being made uncomfortable is bad D&D, and i have played a horny charecter before, several (Paladin of Vengence, a couple of rouges) but no means no is sacrosanct to them, and i made one a Johny Bravo.
Introstory: aww, 40k. The GM is being needlessly difficult. I guess in the 41st century. There is only bad GMs
Second story: Oh, this group are monsters. There were being murder hobos. The DM was awsome
3rd. Just write a novel. The DM needed to take controle, best friend or not. They are taking the fun of it
4. OP needs an Adult, OP needs an adult.
Its funny a story comes up with players creating lore on the spot cause in my FF Pathfinder game my character (a runaway from a xenophobic kingdom) made an off comment about how a certain cat like race should be extinct cause of his old homes xenophobic ways. The DM rolled with it and made it so theyre race actually moved off to a pocket dimension during a large attack seemingly making in look like they went extinct. Again meant nothing by the comment and it changed everything.
Story 2
It sounded like this group had it out for OP and just kill off Op’s character.
The DM should have never let OP play drow-but I am glad they did step in and kicked out the problem party.
What's the problem with playing Drow? Neither the player nor his Drow did anything wrong.
Drow and half-drow are a legal option for player characters. Nothing forced or justified any of the party to hate OP's character
If the player wants to play a half-drow, and it doesn't break the lore of the campaign, they should be allowed to do so, and if the other players or their characters have issue with it, it should be stated and discussed beforehand, rather than the players conspiring to kill another character because the characters don't like drow rogues. If it had been properly discussed beforehand, it could have been a great RP moment to have them talk it out in character and become closer for it.
If the group wasn't comprised of stubborn losers, they coupd have had wonderful character building moments learning that "Not all Drow/Rouges/Dark Magic users are bad" and building a friendship with their new half-Drow buddy.
I wouldn't think it's the PC's race at fault here but rather none of the other players saying they have backstory reasons to neither trust drow or rogues bc it still came off as all of them save for DM targeting this person's character for no reason. Though the most likely reason is the other players didn't want OP to be playing and whether or not they had a drow rogue wouldn't change how they got treated.
The half drow story sounds like it could be a great D&D shield hero esc web series
Anyone who takes my flower power away will meet an end via a very vivid description of how the flowers bury you. Kidding but am I?
For the first story. Get a water pistol. Every time they get tiresome splash them .
That party in the 4 on 1 story seemed more like they were chaotically stupid aligned. While their role playing wasn’t bad, they had In story reasons for their initial dislike of OP’s character, they definitely took it to a personal level after the OP dropped his weapons. That could’ve been a perfect time for some good RP but nope, the stupid prevailed and now those 4 are out on their butts!
relating to the 3rd story, in my game I don't mind if my players throw in some last lore, (my homebrew world is vast and has deep lore), just don't flat out re wright a chunk of it for no reason, and if you do have reason make it so it can be woven into the history.
EG: my story, so the City was held by the Azure Oder for 300 years before it was taken, by the forces of Bahamut, (that's my version),
don't say, the city never returned to Bahamut and is still under the command of the Oder, some 5,000 years later. because your character is a Cleric of Tiamat and received a vision of the truth in a dream.
what could work would be, the forces of Bahamut took the city only after the War of the Dragon finished,
I know this is a long-winded way of saying, if your players add more lore to your world, that's not always a bad thing just as long as it doesn't contradict your Lore too much.
"just because your thing isn't as bad as other things, doesn't mean it's not bad"
I had a similar issue once
I am not terribly fond of physical contact outside of people I'm really close with, like family or crushes, and one of my dnd character I gave a similar trait
I guess I got a bit too immersed because it would bother me immensely whenever the fighter who my char didn't get along with literally pushed her around or just put her hand on my char's shoulder to make her shut up (felt kinda threathening, but was more meant as a friendly warning from their side I think, since my char would always be a bit reckless beforehand)
well, long story short I didn't want to snap at them even in character because I didn't want to ruin the mood or anything like that and because they didn't mean anything bad with it, so I just bottled it up
but I vented to a friend a bit about it and she convinced me to just roleplay it out when it's an actual part of my character, or else it will never stop
so soon after that advice I did snap at the fighter in character when her char touched mine again and from then on I also didn't hold back with npcs - one time a pc retired and hugged everyone good bye, so I said that my char doesn't look happy but tolerates it and later on when I was flirting with a barkeep he touched my hands or something and I instantly got feisty, then with borders clearly defined we went back to friendly banter and drinks
actually I give many of my characters that trait that they don't like physical contact when it fits their background
Far traveller for example has a suggested personality trait that's "I have different ideas about personal space than others" or something along those lines so that's usually "don't touch them for me"
the character from the story though was a criminal and had that trait simply because I made her paranoid af, with trust issues and some literal scars from a fight she once had when her family (gang) got attacked
One character who has the trait has a special spin to it though, it's not that they don't like physical contact but instead they absolutely despise telepathy and other mind tricks being initiated against them from anyone else but their kraken master (warlock) because of backstory reasons
My most recent character concept is a Frost Sorcerer that accidentally froze her parents to death as a pre-teen and as a result has a lot of self-loathing to deal with as well as a near phobia of people touching her for fear of accidentally killing them.
And here I though the part 2 of party try to the kill Op story be the highlight been the femcel came and stole that by a landslide . She really turned OP’s cool rage story concept into either kill bandits or go to a brothel . My theory is dm had a crush and was using game to express feelings , trolling or idk .
Player just adding lore into the game… funnily enough I’ve seen a game use that as an actual mechanic without yanking control away from the GM.
Exalted 3rd Edition has a way to use the Lore skill (I can’t remember the name of this use, annoyingly) where you can try to just introduce a fact. You have to make a lore check and the difficulty is determined by how plausible the GM thinks it’d be. Like if you were trying to escape pursuit in a city someone could introduce the idea that there’s a big pop-up market that happens every two weeks and just happens to be on today and is only a couple blocks away with crowds big enough to lose their pursuers in.
It's literally called 'Introduce Fact', and it's GREAT for communal setting-building, but it works best because even if you do introduce a fact, it still needs the Storyteller to sign off on it, and if there's a reason it doesn't click, then you get a chance to find a compromise.
How do these weirdos keep getting in the tables ? 😳