Thank you for all the feedback so far about this series! One big note that I am seeing is I need to read the comments more with the Reddit posts to see if OP says anything else. That’s good to know and I’ll be on the lookout of that more in future reads. Hope you are enjoying the series! 💜
You guys are way to lenient on the problem player in the first story, it shouldn't matter about the role play, the moment the OP paused the game the first time to talk to his players is when the players should have compromised and get on with the game, but instead they dragged their heals and did everything to avoid playing the game.
@@pallydan893totally agree. As player on numerous occasions i've intentionally done thing i know my character wouldn't have done to help keep things flowing for the GM. This oh "its what my character would do" is such typical bs that problem players use as an excuse to be A-holes.
I would disagree with Duke here. While yes the GM can be blamed for not setting up hooks that is fair for a campaign but like call of cthulu is very case based and if you have agreed to play the game then you the player have agreed you will take the hook. If you character would not do it then you should speak with the GM about either changing the character or making a new one.
A DM should make sure the character have a reason to do something. But the players should also make sure they make a character that would get involved. They are both in the wrong. If the DM didn't give them an idea at all about what the idea of the RP is going to be back, they are in the wrong. But if the players knew and they went against and made a character that wouldn't get involved is their fault.
I disagree too. The issue CoC is that is set in the 20th century and you are player regular people. So calling the police is often a smart option. I haven’t played the game myself but I know from reading both Old Man Henderson and Puffin Forest videos that the way to avoid this is to have at least one player who is a police officer, detective, private eye or someone else who has a reason to get involved in dangerous situations that will occur. The issue is the DM has them all be average joes. Why wouldn’t they call the police in this situation? At best you are going to find yourself with a pair of cement shoes because the kidnapping was don by a mafia family.
"Why would a professor get involved?" Indiana Jones. Lara Croft. Nathan Drake. Sherlock Holmes. Players and "Forever DM" were 100% in the wrong. They agreed to play, and then just didn't. Rude. I wouldn't get "revenge", but I would also drop that game group. You don't sit down at a chess board after accepting a match, and then refuse to move a piece.
@@Shade01982 I mean the point is that they have what are otherwise more mundane jobs (except Nathan Drake,) but tend to go on major adventures for less reasoning than the campaign
@@homerman76 Oh sure, that's definitely true, but those guys are still major exceptions to the rule. Adding that to the character would have provided the necessary flavor to make this story believable, instead of "Generic Professor 1".
But then why would you create a character who would actively avoid taking part in an adventure IN AN ADVENTURE GAME! The 'Forever DM' was either angry at the poster for some unmentioned reason or they are just an A-hole, as that was clearly intentional sabotage.
Story 1: I feel that if you're going into an RPG as a player, it is your responsibility to create a character that would go on the sort of adventures that the GM is offering. Otherwise, what's the point of even bothering to show up to the game? You had might as well, play Skyrim, and spend the entire game drinking mead at the inn in Riverwood and chopping wood to pay for the mead.
It's also. I don't know how explicitly it was said in the story. But the fact the player who ruined it was refered to as 'the Forever DM' implies that this player is not as experienced with running games, since that player usually does it. And you can't expect an inexperienced GM to set up perfect plot hooks. Same as you can't expect new players to know all their abilities and use them well. Those are just eventualities you have to be ready for and willing to adjust for or, if need be, talk about. The Forever DM essentially refused to do any of that. He judged the game as if he had prepared it, was unwilling to co-operate at all, and when directly approached to try and find a solution everyone may be happy with went "Nah".
THIS so much. I hate the idea that the game master not only has to prepare an entire adventure but also provide an explicit reason for every single player character to go through with it. Like, no bro, that's what backstories are for, and that's the player's job. The only exception I'll make to this is for long campaigns since there's time to develop character motivations, but for the first few sessions or a one-shot, you shouldn't have to try and convince your players to actually play the game.
Oh, I would. And I'd go the sabotage route. DM: "There's a dungeon just outside of town. It's probably full of monsters and treasure." Me: "Oh, how horrible! I promptly go to the nearest town guard station and inform them of this terrible danger. I'm sure the proper authorities can handle this." DM: "...you're not going into the dungeon? You're just going to stay here in town?" Me: "Oh, yes! Most definitely! After all, I'm just a simple shopkeeper. Why would I involve myself in such things? Far too dangerous for me." And then I'd just *look* at him.
Yeah this forever DM is an ass if you actually read the ops post history. This Forever DM litterlerly killed the ending of a 2 year campaign by adding a sub BigBadGuy and making it so the players couldn't beat him even though they beat the original BigBadGuy. Then in rushed the DMs PC and a NPC to save the day. Trust me this forever DM did this on purpose.
Yeah, that’s what I thought initially hearing the title that they got into some kind of real life argument/fight and the police showed up. Or that the intro to the game was just so disturbing they decided the DM was in fact a serial killer or such.
First story is literally the horror of including the dm as a player. They're too used to driving the story. You have to be able to pull them to the side in the beginning and ask "Do you want to play this at all? No horror movie is set up around people who want to be there."
Or just have a better job at setting it up so it would be in character to have them follow the plot hook. Don’t make them all college professors have a cop or private eye in the group. Or just throw in something the police wouldn’t believe the party so that isn’t an option.
@@emberfist8347ok, but if the police are handling it, what is there for the players to do? Also, if the guy is saying, "I think I'd rather just quit," he's a bad player. Negotiate.
Obviously if you are being a college professor, you should be the sort of college professor that would follow down a winding path of a horror story. You wouldn’t go check with the wife of your colleague to check why he hasn’t shown up to work lately?
Or if they are so hellbent on "not our problem not our capability" even it is their close friend they could be suspected of being responsible of the professor's disappearance and they are just trying to make a cover up story so now they have to venture to clear their name and find their friend. Because you know nothing motivates someone like being accused of a crime they didn't commit, but by that they upped the difficulty by 50% since now they has to go against eldritch horror and avoid authorities.
@@emberfist8347The DM set up a really cool and interesting campaign idea...but it's obvious that the forever DM just didn't want to play this game and just dragged his feet until they stopped playing. If he didn't want to play this then he should have said right from the start and not made the other DM waste his campaign on him. 😓
For that first story, the Keeper should have just said to the forever-DM: "You're correct, your professor character needs some kind of reason to go investigate. So please come up with one so we can keep playing the game."
"it's what my character would do" is kindof bullsh!t in a one-shot imho, I get it if you're doing a multi-month campaign your character needs to be a character, a complete person and they need to be consistent, but you can't build that kindof character in a couple of hours
@@msihcs8171I think you can. A college professor isn’t normally going to do their own Miss Marple investigation. They would get a professional to do it. So have a professional be in the party.
@@emberfist8347 I mean, sure you can say that, it's one reason why I'm a little unsure if we're getting the full picture here. Typically a one-shot isn't going to have a Matt Mercer level of complete world. At some point players may need to just roll with it if they want to play a game. I kindof get the idea from the players responses that there's a lack of interest
@@emberfist8347There are college professors who ARE doing that. University in Arkham is even sending students to try to find out information about "unnatural" things. So yeah. Professors investigating what happened to their colleague is something that could have happened. Especially when police said that they won't do anything. Also if you can't find a reason for a character that you will use ONCE and only ONCE in this oneshot campaign then you either need to get out of the table or change the character for him/her to have a reason.
That first story almost sounds like DM was playing his character like an NPC. But there's an element of wondering if they were just resentful they were not playing 5E. On the second story: it's also kind of wild for the studio to be wanting a game for in-house benefits but expecting their EMPLOYEES to be the ones paying the "fair wage". If the higher ups believe this DM is worth "a fair wage" they should be the one paying it.
The forever pc just sunk the game, the Keeper had to say to the players ‘this is the game I prepared’ and the forever-DM said ‘I’d rather not play’. That’s rough. I don’t think the hooks and Keeper’s logic were so bad. At some points the players have to realize there is a game being played and it’s not real life lol. Imagine going to a friends house and behaving this way? I’d be mad, not embarrassed. :)
Agreed. The DM has to put a lot of effort into preparing a hook and a plot and adventure for the players to sink their teeth in. Sometimes, these ideas and plots aren't perfect, and it's fine for players to poke at it and challenge the DM to fill these plot holes, or admit they made a mistake and learn from it. But there's also the onus on the players to recognize a plot hook and be willing to take the bait. Play along. You're all at that table to have fun. Don't do things that break your immersion for your own character, of course, but also recognize that you're there to experience an adventure.
Yeah, it sounded to me like the pc’s didn’t build good characters for this story, if they have no incentive to pursue the game. That may also be on the dm, not working with them to create characters, but i’d expect the forever dm to know better and adjust on the fly. I mean that’s the main challenge of being a dm, rolling with pc decisions, one way or another. Or, what I think is more likely, dm just didn’t wanna play. Really a shame we don’t get to know more about the other players, that’d make it easier to understand each person’s reasoning, and who should adjust their gameplay accordingly.
I think the Forever DM saying that infamous line is just him rubbing the salt in the wound, basically him just going, "Yeah I know what you're trying to get me to do but nah I'm not gonna play along." I mean seriously, if you have criticism of the DM's setup talk to them after the session is over and/or in private don't just be petty and ignore the game, that just hurts the DM running it and they'll more than likely not run that type of game with you again. And I do agree the DM running the CoC game should definitely NOT do that same thing back, that'll only end badly.
Specially as a DM, he should've know much better :/ "This is what my character would do", while derailing the campaign by doing so, is just a dick-move...
I wonder if the OP who was running the CoC one shot ever said that to the Forever DM during a session. As a Forever DM, they probably dealt with that line themselves at some point so I wonder why they would say that to OP knowing how much "It's what my character would do" can derail a game.
@@killer_rabbit42 Reciprocating pettiness goes nowhere except ruining any relationship you might have with the other person and the people around both parties. It doesn't matter who started it if you can't resolve your issues like adults, or at all, then it's time to part ways or minimize your interactions and definitely do NOT play TTRPGs together.
@@madwookie9844 I completely agree. I think pettiness is the wrong path to take in any situation. I'm just wondering, since this is the internet & we don't have both sides of the story, if maybe the reason Forever DM did that to OP was because OP did that to them at some point. For a Forever DM to do something like that seems odd to me because they would know that it could be disruptive to the game. The DM would know all about adventure hooks & clues to get things going & see what OP was trying to do. So where did saying that come from? The only thing that makes sense to me is if OP said that to Forever DM & disrupted other games. And I could be completely wrong about all of it, but that's my thought process on the situation.
The forever-DM went out of their way to not play along and they ended up playing something else instead of DnD, which could have been what he was trying to do. In DnD, there's some expectation to play along with the story. While you could say that options sometimes arise that the DM needs to adapt to, this wasn't that. This was someone starting a video game and getting a game over because they chose to stay at home. If the forever-DM wanted to be difficult, they should have warned DM ahead of time so that they can prepare for someone dragging their feet at every turn (or maybe just kick them from the party 'cause that's obnoxious).
I think the forever dm was taking the opportunity to try and show how much better/smarter of a dm he is and how grateful they should be that HE usually ruins things.
In the rare chances I get to play, dude I'm ALL IN. I'm looking for traps, I'm biting hooks like a trout, I'm RPing shopping. It's weird to me that a "forever DM" gets a chance to play the game and just refuses to do so. Why agree to be a player if you're going to do that.
Like someone commented elsewhere, I wonder if the foreverDM just didn’t want to play CoC. And the other player saying his character wouldn’t think he was smart enough……. A college professor?? in that setting not having ego of being smarter than a policeman. Perhaps the OP should have had the cops insult the professor’s intelligence. And the second story…. Yeah I don’t know anyone that’s going to sign up to pay for something with no information about what it is. “Anybody want to give me $25 for a box of stuff? No I’m not going to tell you anything about the stuff or the box it’s in”
I wish, my forever blew up my final boss fight by making a broken character, that killed him in one hit. He said it was to teach me to properly look at character sheets. I told him all he taught me was he was dick. I made the one shot in a week, and didn't have time to check his sheet. Ruined a perfectly fun night/one shot.
6:40 Imagine adventurers who see zombies in the crypt for the first time and say "ok, this is not what I expected, I have a family to feed, I better go back to town"....
@@username172that happened to me. I set up my character wanting nothing to do with pirates, then the gm said the group is going to a pirate run territory. We agreed upon me running a temporary character.
Story 1: While sure, the dm should provide motive to their players, it's also on the players to be *receptive* to those motives. If the player is playing a character that wouldn't do the adventure stuff, then it's on them to make a character that *would* do adventure stuff.
@@emberfist8347 Plenty of movies where a professor or researcher does their own investigation. indiana Jones and The Conjuring come to mind. If they can't do that for a one shot then they really need to get with the TTRPG program.
As someone totally outside of the TTRPG community, I agree that in a professional setting a GM should be paid, but NOT by the employees. If a business wants their employees to take part in something like this, then the business needs to pay the GM. In non-professional settings it would be nice if the others in the group chipped in (not mandatory) to help pay for any supplies they want. And this should all be discussed beforehand to avoid any weirdness.
Story #2 is genuinely horrifying to me and the epitome of everything wrong with 2020s society and humanity. That having been said, you really should expect this type of behavior working in any sort of "artistic" field these days, if ya know what I mean.
If the DM says to you, in a meta sense, hey, this is it, if you don't go on this adventure, we are done playing, it is also on you to figure out why your character would go. Like at that point your character suddenly becomes a sherlock holmes fan and weirdly confident the books impart them with real detective skills or something. We don't sit down to at the table to play one of the 1000 people who went to the police when they should, and then went about their boring lives. We sat down to play one of the 3 who didn't, and went on a crazy adventure.
There's a big difference between the mindset of people born in the late 20th century and early 21st century vs those born in the late 19th early 20th. When I was playing CoC it was set in the 1920's and there are some campaigns set in the 1890's There's a lot of documented police corruption in New York, Chicago, and LA during the early 1900's and I'm sure the same may be true in New Orleans. There are a lot of things that were done then that police absolutely can NOT do now. Warrantless searches, beatings, and no Miranda rights, it was a different time and if the players didn't try understand that then maybe CoC wasn't for them
For the forever dm, the best solution could be that his profesor character leaves, and the Keeper proceeds to handle him a 'police detective' character saying: there, now YOU are the police, solve the case, and you would need the help of these profesors as consultants, which is usually done
Or have a cop or PI to begin with. The missing persons in New Orleans plot is probably from one of Lovecraft’s short stories where the protagonist was a cop.
The forever DM seems to have intentionally avoid the plot hook, and by the sounds of it, the group wanted to do D&D. This makes me think that the party wanted to do that instead.
Then why didn't they say so to the new D.M.? It's not hard to say "Hey, Call of Cthulhu isn't really my thing. Could we play 5e instead?" before the D.M. puts in hours of work into a game no one is going to enjoy or even want to participate in. Communication is key in these kinds of things.
@@sunshinegamer1981 Because they're a bad player. They CHOSE to torpedo the game instead of talking to them. I feel sorry for the DM that crafted the story and hope he finds a better group of friends to play with.
Seems to me that the Forever DM was perhaps that for a reason, he had no real interest in playing as a character and perhaps was actively seeking to tank the game so he could go back to DMing
I agree. The forever DM either had a beef with the OP and wanted to get revenge for all the times the OP said "That's what my character would do" or they just don't want to be a player and were sabotaging the game.
@@LeonardHarristhey definitely don't want to be a player. This is a dm that wants to be a dm for control. Look at op's previous posts, seemingly about this dm. One of them was even reviewed before, with "they all cast fireball".
This is interesting because this week I played my first CoC game, which was also the first time my DM ran a CoC game. In my personal opinion, it is _my_ responsibility as a player to make my character engaged in solving the mystery. If my character is not invested in the plot it is not because the DM failed to provide a proper hook, it is because I failed to give my character sufficient motivation.
The thing about CoC: A typical Lovecraft story starts out as "this ain't a big deal, we don't need to call in outside help". But then it rapidly develops into "oh my god, we cannot possibly tell anyone about this". I think that's what the OP was trying to do here. He told the players "there is no indication of a crime" and "you're just trying to figure out what he might be up to". If the players had ever gotten to the "unspeakable secret" part, then that would have been their motivation for pressing on. But they didn't, because they simply refused to go along with the plot right off the bat.
First story: concern for their colleague was the motivation, motivation supplied. The only thing the GM might of done differently is explain the premise of Call of Cthulhu differently. "Regular folk get wrapped up in amateur detective work investigating the occult in a horror setting." If you play D&D and you see some goblins raiding a caravan do you turn around and fetch the City Guard? That is what most characters should do; but the premise of D&D is you will fight them because you are an adventurer. In the same way the premise of Call of Cthulhu is you will investigate, not hire a detective (unless said detective is another player character then they will bring their clients along for no good reason). Edit: The GM had great solutions for the police and PI and even explicitly stated the players need to be the investigators for the adventure to happen.
@@emberfist8347 no, it does not. You start off as a nobody with barely any skill and will get your ass wooped even by a peasant if luck isn't on your side.
@@emberfist8347 dude, Call of Cthulhu is literally based off short stories that mostly involve amateur investigators diving into things for the sake of their own curiosity. If the Forever DM couldn't be bothered to engage in the world on its terms that's on him.
Honestly, the first OP was very clearly laying out the hooks. CoC is supposed to be normal people and people on the edges of the occult being pulled into the deep end. Every opportunity was there. Forever DM was purposely avoiding every call, and OOC all but said he did not care about what the OP put forward. The college professors, given that a coworker went missing, might all be in the same department and thus would have interest in the artifact.
That isn’t stated by OP. The issue is OP set it in a city and didn’t have a cop as a PC. The one-shot has similarities to a short story from Lovecraft where the protagonist was a cop.
I really like Duke's horror stories, I watch a lot of horror stories on YT and often people just take 1 side and shit on the other like it's black and white. But Duke tries to understand both sides, analyze them what could be the cause and how to fix it instead "yeah this person is at fault"
"we have to keep everything secretive" flashback to my first session of my current campaign where my DM wouldn't allow us to describe our characters once the first one of us had woken up (we were kidnapped), they just listed out our races as other people in the cell. I felt it really put me out to not get a chance to make the first impression on the group of what my character looks like.
I've never thought about DMs getting paid but it makes sense. A now-closed (thanks Covid) local game shop near my college had a "membership" fee that players had to pay after their second or third session in order to continue in the campaign. It wasn't a true membership fee but it helped cover the costs of keeping the shop open longer and paying the DM employee for DMing. They were super flexible with it because they knew most of us were broke college kids who couldn't pay bunch of money, especially all at once, so you could do a payment plan where you paid a little at each session. They let you get a couple of free sessions so you could decide if you wanted to be in the campaign, and IIRC, brand new players (never played before kind of new) may have gotten one more free session or a reduced fee or something like that. I miss that shop. Yeah, I totally agree with DMs getting paid if they're doing it professionally. If it's like you and your buddies running a game in your basement every Friday night, then I think it's a little more nuanced and definitely requires a discussion amongst the group
The problem is, literally *everything's* pay to play these days. Where does it end? And if I'm being forced to pay for things I did for free for decades, then I should have certain privileges to go along with that and if I don't get those privileges then I'm out. For example, I'm no paying just to have my PC killed off in the first or second sessions, just like I'm not paying to use a formerly free website just to have what I say censored. Screw that.
Regarding story one: Part of the whole "it's what my character would do" has to include aligning your character with the genre in play. In real life, sure a college professor would start out by going to the police or hiring a PI, but in the whole murder mystery turned cosmic horror that lovecraft inhabits, of course the professor has to go looking for the missing person himself: that's just what people do.
the CoC one, i feel that just because they were college professors, it felt very nit picky of the "forever DM" to do what he did, it's like me being a Farmer and being attacked, some people grab any kind of weapons they can find to defend their lands, and then i go "no no, i'm a farmer, i do not fight, i farm" it's just Dumb. He was being a nit picky petty bastard, and the other 2 seemed to be the classic Sheep, someone "takes charge" and they follow and agree without any input of their own. The DM was clearly trying to set something up and the FDM was honestly being a c*nt, plain and simple. Be a good player and just roll with it, don't use that "it's what my character would've done" BS. Cause i've Always hated that "it's what my character would do" okay, i kill your MC for the story because "it's what my character would do" GTFO with that excuse. And as for Duke's and Wife's response of reasoning, that feels way too...Educated of a response. It's like one of those moments where a School Bully must've had a rough childhood, has trouble at home and such, or Maybe, they're Just an a**hole, plain and simple.
People tend to confuse a persons reasoning with an excuse that makes the behavior okay. The fact that many bullies used to be bullied themselves, explains why they do it, but doesn’t make it right. And yeah, the way duke and wifey(duchess) explained themselves it came across as the latter.
Call of cthulu story: I feel like the forever DM become immediately the ahole in the scenario when OP was honest and expressed that it would end the story that they put a lot of work into. I feel like after that, you're just being a bad player.
I would have loved to play that first campaign. The concept tickled my brain and I love the mystery. College professors aren’t just boring nerds, they’re excited nerds who are incredibly passionate. They’d jump on the case and explore it, and would probably try to take their expertise and see who can solve the mystery first, even if they work together. That seems like a perfectly logical campaign idea, and it was beautifully crafted. I feel horrible for that DM.
Story #1: If you as a player control a character, it's your job to play them in a way that makes them stand out. If you just play them to fit in, you are controling an npc and therefore aren't a player participating in the game but a little helper for the DM...
It is very nice to see a RUclipsr give an opinion or react series that sees all sides and isn’t super quick to judge. You really weighed the options and gave it a good objective look. As always, you’re the best ❤
Honestly, I was expecting they went full "Karen" & actually called the police on the DM. I haven't actually heard of that happening, but I've gone deep enough into the "DM Horror Story Rabbit Hole" to at least know it's not impossible.
I could swear I saw an RPG horror story video years ago where one player actually did escalate things to the point where yes, the rest of the group really did have to call 911.
Man, that first story gets me. No one sits down to play chess and then instead commits to an intense diplomatic back-and-forth with their opponent in order to prevent hostilities. Like... I'm sorry, but if I sit down to a game of Call of Cthulu, my character is gonna solve crimes and delve into insanity, not play a completely different game by calling the cops and ending it all there. I feel like there was more going on with that "forever DM," because the forever DMs I know personally wouldn't purposefully start playing Diplomacy when given the chance to play Chess, so to speak.
The forever DM was really trying to make the campaign something completely different. The one who charged 50$/week who would have been getting 550$/week if everyone else played didn’t know much about DMing and seems like that’s not a hot take. Because of this however he shouldn’t price himself as gold. I remember when it said that 25$/week would be roughly his pay but they failed to remember dnd is meant to be fun for all parties and that you aren’t spending 8 hours a day working on this campaign.
what I found a bit odd, is that they expected to be paid for the session zero, upfront on top of that. I know someone who used to give language courses, and the first course was always free, so you knew what to expect if you want to stick to it.
@@delfinenteddyson9865 Yeah... that sounded like some scam to me. If someone is making TTRPG session a product with a price tag there needs to be some 'sample' or 'disclaimer' to what was to be expected. Basic stuff like what system is going to be played is first thing anyone that is into rpg will ask.
Two thoughts: perhaps Forever DM was getting revenge on exasperating behavior the current DM exhibited as a player. Second, perhaps there is a reason why Forever DM was mandated to Forever and should never be a player.
Love these segments. Keep them coming! As for the first case, there exists a certain social contract when people play any game. In TTRPGPs, is shouldn’t solely land on the DM’s shoulder to give a motivation to play, because the games is for everyone’s enjoyment. The players should be willing to bend a little to give their characters a motivation to go on an adventure and to continue the game.
The forever DM in the first one was definitely in the wrong They definitely knew what they were doing and it sounds like the other players just followed along with them because they took the lead The OP set everything up for the game and the Forever DM instead of just going with it for the sake of the game and progression compelty railroaded the whole game and totally did it on purpose I would never play with that group again
@@emberfist8347 depends on who created the PCs. even in that case, though - as an experienced DM wouldn't you be able to instantly see that these characters wouldn't take the hook? why not just SAY SO and sort it out BEFORE the game started? why wait and be disrespectful to the DM and waste everyone's time?
It's Call of Chuthulu!! Of course you jump and become a detective, even though you are professors!! That is the whole setting. I think the OP did great and the forever DM was being a total punk.
The forever DM should be able to come up with a reason to play along with the story, they're a DM. They were either just trying to make someone else feel like how they feel when people don't play along with them, or they're just being a jerk.
I absolutely disagree that the forever dm wasn’t in the wrong in the first story, they decided to ruin that game and the dm tried multiple times to fix it and they didn’t stop
The first one is rough. Imagine doing a rescue mission campaign only to have someone go “Well, actually, my PC already works a 9-5 at the town’s inn so he won’t have time to go. Sorry, he’s a very hard worker so that’s just what he’d do.”
Shoulda had the players switch to playing the private detective/police if the college professors aren't gonna get in on the access. But I hate "It's what my character would do" lines. That sounds like traveling hate to me.
Yeah, but you would probably have someone trying to kill the PCs in that situation like most Keepers. Unlike "a workmate is missing", "someone is trying to murder us" actually works pretty well to motivate most players. And if it doesn't after a few attempted murders and the PCs still ignore it, you can always have the cultists kill them, at least it will make you feel better. Anyone who ever watched a horror movie should know that going to the cops only makes things worse, even "if that is what my character would do". Reward your players when they do something smart, punish them if they do stupid shit. But sure, when they went to the detective you could also just take one of the players character sheets and tell him to make the detective instead. The former PC turned NPC is a perfect murder victim so the other players realize they need to help or die.
@@loke6664or just have them do what OP suggested and have a PI/cop in the party. Going to the cops is actually smarter in this situation because the stereotype the cops only make things worse in horror films isn’t completely true. The general is the horror is supernatural so the cops don’t buy it. More mundane horror films like Scream, the original Black Christmas, or The Terminator (yes it is science fiction but the Terminator was deliberately made to contrast supernatural slashers by looking normal and using guns), the cops do believe the characters. The missing person is a mundane thing the police handle regularly. And that is discounting the various horror films where a cop is the protagonist like Halloween 2018, Psycho, the original Child’s Play, Jaws, or Silent Night, Deadly Knight. So a cop in the party is the best solution.
@@emberfist8347 A PI or the Campus security guard would work but cops can not do a kidnapping investigation together with random civilians. The Campus security guard really make most sense since he can be friends with the other PCs and he could be a former cop who got fired for something so he can have the skills the players need. While going to the cops make sense from the characters point of view, letting the cops actually believe them and taking the case will either mean that you are leaving a large part of the investigation (or basically the module) to NPCs or you need to complicate things a lot by figuring out a plausible reason for the cops involving the players. I assume the module was written so that the investigation itself was the important thing with the clues and maps the Keeper had done, if the cops actually takes the case then the session would be the players sitter and sipping tea in the teachers lounge the entire session. So yeah, the cops need to act like the stupid or evil cops in most horror movies, or just plain incompetent and ignoring all the clues (like assuming it was communists who are the kidnappers or something).
I have to say that in the first case ,the CoC one-shot, Trail of Cthulhu solve this in a way that every charactar has a huge incentive to follow this person, vengeance, power... is always something personal that should be followed by the character because is what they are. Also is worth mentioning some people only want to play 5e...
I'd be p*ssed at Forever DM! I would have picked up my stuff and walked out. I've play antagonistic players, but not to the point that I've shut down the game. I'm there to play. As for paid DM? That is totally up to the individual. I personally would not. I'm wondering if the higher up was looking to take a cut?
In regards to story 1: I'd have the say that the Forever DM definitely meta-gamed it. From what the story says the reason he wanted to go to the police or call 911 was because this was dangerous and he didn't think his character would get involved with it. From what the OP said all they knew right now was that the other professor was missing. Up to that point, the OP hadn't described anything that gave even a hint of danger so why would he instantly be wanting to call the police? I've been a player in some of those types of campaigns, it starts off where you're not thinking anything nefarious has happened you just start looking for your friend, and by the time the first hint of actual danger occurs it's to late for you to turn back. It sounds like the Forever DM was jumping forward to the first hint of danger and immediately calling the cops before there was any in-game preventing that action.
First story: God I can't defend the Forever-DM. You don't agree to play a game and then not play the game. It's like booting up GTA and just mowing your lawn and doing legit jobs. I don't understand how none of the players decided to be the instigator and draw the other players into it. I don't agree that no one was in the wrong. You are there to play a game, being petty and not playing the game is not ok. Second Story: I agree some DMs should be paid or tipped or whatever, because like they said, you only get so many hours in a day and you have to cut into something to DM. Though with no info on the game and no advertising of what the game even is. The higher ups are also just stupid.
The thing about CoC vs 5E is CoC is a *very* different experience. Liking one game doesnt necessarily mean you're going to enjoy the other. I personally dont care for CoC's system, but I enjoy when I get to play it with my friends because they make it fun. In the first story though it sounds like they didn't even want to give the system a chance. Or at least the forever DM didn't and the other players maybe followed his lead because of his DMing experience. I hope OP tried the campaign again with a group that does have CoC experience and created something horrifying out of it
Well, I can certainly tell why Forever-DM in story 1 is a forever DM. Geez I really hope OP turned it right around on his ass by doing the same thing when he's back in the DM chair.
Story 1: I got the feeling that OP and forever DM have some form of history or problems etc, because he really focused on the FDM and barely said anything about the other 2 at the table, it's not like the other two are npcs they have thier own agency and choose to go along with forever DM and yet OP solely focuses on the one guy and instead talking about all three of them. Story 2: Jesus christ this sounds like a shit place to work tbh
I've noticed that forever DMs have a bad tendency to not engage with the plot because "Why would I?" or "It's what my character would do." My forever DM played in two games I was in, and in both of them he played characters that actively refused to engage with the plot, which wouldn't have been quite so bad had he not become group leader in one of those games, meaning we couldn't engage if he wouldn't. The first character was a mercenary who was unwilling to take any job he thought he might struggle with and was consequently given a job he would struggle with, and the other character was a druid who outright ran away from most combat encounters despite being our healer because "he wasn't a fighter" despite the other party members being frontlines so he wouldn't have to engage in combat. He dropped out of the first game because we eventually decided to engage the plot without him, and he ended up making a new "dumber" (his words, not mine) character for our second game since we were dissatisfied with him mistaking cowardice for wisdom.
"It's what my character would do." This is a line given by players to absolve themselves of accountability for their actions and choices, blaming it on an imaginary character. The response is "you are in total control of your character. You decide who your character is, what your character feels, and what your character would do. If you created a character for a role playing game based on investigation in a Lovecraftian world, and created that character to be a character that wouldn't engage in investigation in a Lovecraftian world, that is what *you* did. Because your character is make believe. It doesn't have any agency. Only you do."
1st story sounds like the group just didn't want to play CoC. CoC has a VERY different tone than DnD. In DnD, you start out as semi-heroic characters, even at level 1. CoC characters are essentially average joes. The PCs in DnD ARE the best people for the job. In CoC, the PCs are generally NOT well equipped to deal with what is going on. I have played Mansions of Madness, and most of those scenarios start with, "you agreed to help look for a missing person after the authorities were unable/unwilling" or "you were invited to X location and weird stuff starts happening", just to avoid these problems.
To the first one: If "what your character would do" does derail the whole adventure, your character is just noz suitable for this adventure. It is that easy sometimes ^^' Call of Cthulhu is all about non-fighter characters in an extremly dangerous setting, even if they don't get to see that untill it is too late. They are not supposed to fight often, they are supposed to do detective work and even encouraged to run away from monsters rather than actually fighting them. The DM of this campaign did sound like he did all he could in in setting up an interessting game and the forever-DM just derailed it on purpose... Those college professors were all good friends with the missing one. So this should be reason enough to at least investigate a little, when the police is unwilling to help. Now to the second one: Not even telling the system or setting is just dumb. How could the players prepare in any way for session 0? And that he feared about his intellectual property... like... what? Is he okay? Taking money for DMing is a choice. I think it is even valid, to take some money, from people you don't actually know at all, to be honest. After all, you do put alot of work into it and if it is not for friends, than it is just work like any other. And stuff like subscriptions for virtual TTRPG pages for more and better functions also is not free. But 25$ per player and week (which it was in the first post)... that is alot. And yeah... rising that up to 50$... heck no. That art studio is like... really weird to say the least. I imagine some old ass people beeing the higher ups, who don't even understand art...
@@emberfist8347 Because the usual reaction of the professionals is: "Nah, they just ran away, we will not investigate." ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ And you can extend that in this setting even more, because the supernatural nature gives those professionals often even more reasons to just don't do their job.
Story 1: Doesn't matter what the Plot Hooks were or what system it is. Its up to the PCs to take the bloody Plot Hooks. The plot cannot begin, if they just decide "No, I'm doing this instead." And I'm talking about Session 1 here. Players are fully able to deny Plot Hook in a campaign and craft their own adventures and plots...but not at session 1. The story has to begin somehow. At least for Session 1, Players should follow the plot the DM made, just so the world can be fleshed out more, NPCs can be made, locations explored and fleshed out. If I sat down and agreed to play Curse of Strahd, and Session 1, I say "No, my character isn't going to Barovia because he's sat at home in Waterdeep" then why dafuq did I agree to Curse of Strahd, when I made a character, who will never experience the adventure? The entire plot of the adventure, hinges on being taken to Barovia, and denying that denies the game As for Call of Cthulu, thats a system where you're always playing as a regular human. Its not like D&D where PCs are Mages and Swordsmen and Kung Fu Masters who reasonably accept the risk of danger cause they can handle it. In Call of Cthulu, you kinda have to suspend your disbelief as to why regular people decide to go down the cosmic horror rabbit hole cause they'll never realistically be able to handle it, but they have to go for it for the plot to exist
That forever DM just likes being contrarian. Or enjoys feeling superior, so he's nitpicking stuff and trying to force the DM to do things his way (oh, that's not a good enough motivation, come up with something better, or I'm not gonna play). Sure, the personal stakes weren't there but the players could've easily come up with something thrmselves (fe Oh no, that professor was my friend/lover/relative, I have to find them). You agreed to play this RPG, only to go 'nevermind, this isnt good enough for me, I'm out' before even playing, which is a dick move.
The players knowing they are the main characters is still pretty important for the whole thing. The party I DM for is, without a doubt, completely disfunctional in any non-game setting. Only half of them would ever agree to work together, and the other half would probably kill each other and half of a town while they are at it. But because they know they are players and they are a group, they get their asses together to continue the whole thing. Some of them split off to do their own things every now and then, but they always come back willingly because they very much know what they are supposed to do.
They needed more to go after the missing professor, for sure... that being said a missing person report was almost never taken seriously 40 years ago, especially if it was an adult. Also though it's on the party to make characters what would heed that call, I'm a bit surprised you had even a little bit of that take just specifically since one of the players usually DMs, sounds like the guy just didn't want to play Call of Cthulu.
Re DMs getting paid: I think that there could be situations where it would be logical for players to pay a bit to the DM. I'm thinking mostly of sharing the costs a DM might make. Like if they have to pay money to print their maps, buy minis or whatever (maybe even some compensation for their time). The entire group pitching in to cover costs a DM makes seems perfectly reasonable. However, charging a flat rate wouldn't sit right with me. At least as long as it's an informal game with a group of friends. If you're hiring someone to DM because nobody in your groups wants to it's another matter.
It seems to me that not only did the other players not understand the type of game COC is but the FOREVER GM was trying to insert D&D logic to a supernatural style game where the goal of the Characters is to investigate these things lol Before you ever have any group begin a game they have never before played you need to introduce the idea and concepts behind the game. Like another game PARANOIA which the primary goal of the game is to have you limited number of clones all find the most impressive or amazing why to die. Most games your goal is to survive lol but not all games. I played COC and my character was possessed by an ancient which and the GM took me aside and told me I was dead and the Witch was inside my body. SO i had to role play as the witch pretending to be me and slowly kill off the party. D&D is a very limited game and there are so many amazing other games with far better systems and concepts.
Strongly disagree with the take on the first story. It was a one shot, what level of hook are you expecting? It is no different than a toddler throwing his plate on the floor because his chicken nuggets aren't dinosaur shaped. That's fine when I'm dealing with my 4 year old nephew, my 18 year old nephew pulls that crap and he's getting called out on it. It essentially boiled down to the statement "you didn't custom design this one shot campaign close enough to the character backstory I gave you (based on personal experience likely the day before the campaign started) and expected ME to put forward effort to engage in the game, so screw you I'm not going to play until you improv one right now."
As a DM who was a forever DM for a long while, nah, fam. It's very well-known in this community now that the 'it's what my character would do' can only go so far, especially if it's preventing anything in the story from happening. If the DM didn't create a 'big' enough reason for you to go, you make one for yourself if you want to play (i.e. paranoia that you'll be the next target due to the missing person being in your circle, you becoming too curious like a cat at what is happening, make a reasonable backstory on the spot and asking the DM if it's okay to have this character motivation). Not to mention, this is a One-Shot, meaning there is the expectation to grab the hook (especially since the new DM SPECIFICALLY told them this IS the hook) and play the game, even if it means they have to use suspension of disbelief. If this was a long-term campaign, that's a different story.
Okay Forever DM, roll up a Police Detective, since Prof Boring is obviously staying home. OR, have the police be clueless and ask the players for help with the clues, so the players have the police prompting them to solve stuff, and even have the cops do the legwork until the feces hits the oscillating device. As for the 'pay to play', I feel like the first time it seemed like a trick situation, like buying someone a drink at the bar, they go home with you, and then at your house start mentioning prices... you feel like "dude, I thought you were inviting me to game, not trying to charge me" the second time though, it sounded like they were hiring the guy, so, yeah, in the second instance the GM wasn't the bad guy.
I never understood the point behind agreeing to spend your free time playing a ttrpg and then doing everything in your power to NOT play the campaign set by the DM.
I very much like how ya'll play devil's advocate. I've had so many experiences where people put in their opinion, say that the favored side is wrong and bad, throw around some slurs and accusation, and call it "advocating for both sides", but you guys provide a rare semi-balanced approach.
Comment for the Cthulhu player: there is an easy way to gently nudge your Forever DM out of his "I'm used to being in control and the center"; make the clues somehow converge on the DM's character to make HIM look like the guilty party. All of a sudden, mr "It's above my pay grade" would become, mr. "My fat is in the frier," and we all know how easy it was back in the day to peg a murder on an innocent person and send him off to "the chamber," as it were. Best part is, the more he tries to prove his innocence, the crazier he looks to law enforcement. Insanity IS, after all, the plot of the game, right? "Not guilty by reason of insanity" is always a safer bet than "the chair", anyway.
This was awesome. As a DM I like to have like a beginning and premise of a campaign as well as an end picked out but I like to grow the campaign with player feedback where I change the story based on how the players react to it even the ending being up for change. I like to reveal bits and pieces of the world before the campaign and tell the players the DCs they need to beat and such because I find that they and I find it much more fun that way.
Yeah, that's what I call bad faith role playing in that first game. The whole point of the game is to go investigate and explore and adventure. If you as the player can't imagine your character doing that, you've done a bad job as a player. Not every plot hook is gonna be great but at some point you need to actually ENGAGE with the premise. I absolutely feel the forever DM was completely in the wrong.
Re: the first story, we hear a lot of stories about players nervously taking to DMing for the first time, but I don't hear a lot of dialogue about forever-DMs shaking off the dust to play and having to acclimatise to that. It kind of occurs to me that I think I've come across this sort of thing more than once, with the DM committing HARD to playing a character even if it isn't condusive to telling a story, or otherwise not really having a sense of how to play nice as a party member. Food for thought!
First story; the party seemed to just not be interested in a CoC like game. They were probably used to and really enjoyed more combat heavy games. Also, I think a way of remedying the forever DM's refusal would is to have like a half hour of RP with the missing professor before he goes missing and make him the type of character that they would want to go looking for. Then again, he probably played with groups that took the hook immediately, so I don't think he was prepared for them to just go their own way. Second story; I'm not against paying DMs, but I feel like he was charging too much. I would have lowered the price a bit; since this wasn't a game among friends (for which I do think it should be free, but also have more theater of the mind than set pieces), I think 15 dollars would be good. Also, keeping everything secret is weird. If there's a mystery, like I'm DMing the Strixhaven campaign, so I'm only giving drips and drops of info about the big bad, and they know nothing about his orb yet (they're in third year). But, they knew from the start, this is a magical college, your characters are together because they're roommates, here's all the information your characters would have, do this role, it's going to be at around this difficulty (when I don't out right tell them the number they have to role), etc. I want to start a homebrewed game pretty soon, and I have a homebrewed one shot. The campaign takes place in a fantasy world where there are such and such nations/city-states/empires/tribes, you're members of an adventurers' union, and you get your various jobs from the union hall. The one shot, you're a band in a battle of the bands, and it's heavily influenced by Hanna/Barbara cartoons (mostly Scooby-Doo and similar ones). You're just outside of New Orleans in the late 1960s, and the game is being held at this elf's mansion right on the Bayou. The hire-ups were being dick-holes. If someone doesn't want to buy your product, you can do one of two things and still be in the right. 1. Ask them why. 2. Ignore them. They chose the most dickish option of berating them.
I know this is 11 mon ths old but in regards to the first story the Keeper did nothing wrong. There's a few important things to note 1) This was a oneshot, in a oneshot you either follow the quest outlined or you dont play. If you come across the spooky castle and dont go inside then nothing happens. 2) this was Call of Cthulhu which is very noir/detective based. CoC is all about investigating weird stuff, its roots are so linked into detective stories that one of it's most famous modules is called Horror on the Orient Express (like Murder on the Orient Express) when you play Call of Cthulhu you are signing up to investigate stuff. 3)The missing NPC was a colleague and friend of the PCs they did have a reason to investigate. Sure you or i in basic common sense would go 'nope im saying away' but again Call of Chulhu, PCs dont have self-preservation instincts if they did then they wouldnt be PCs.
Its always fun to watch dukes material hes helped me figure out how to he a better GM... though im failing but I can always come back for more of his video so thats a plus!
![Lil Uzi Vert - We Good [Official Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/DrSfBULAsek/mqdefault.jpg)
![Yeat & Quavo - 5BRAZY [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4XxnTAwyxus/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you for all the feedback so far about this series! One big note that I am seeing is I need to read the comments more with the Reddit posts to see if OP says anything else. That’s good to know and I’ll be on the lookout of that more in future reads.
Hope you are enjoying the series! 💜
You guys are way to lenient on the problem player in the first story, it shouldn't matter about the role play, the moment the OP paused the game the first time to talk to his players is when the players should have compromised and get on with the game, but instead they dragged their heals and did everything to avoid playing the game.
Also when a op says they have posted about something or someone before you should look into their other post
Solution
Have some pieces of evidence that can implicate each character.
@@tonyromasco1735 like Clue
@@pallydan893totally agree. As player on numerous occasions i've intentionally done thing i know my character wouldn't have done to help keep things flowing for the GM. This oh "its what my character would do" is such typical bs that problem players use as an excuse to be A-holes.
I would disagree with Duke here. While yes the GM can be blamed for not setting up hooks that is fair for a campaign but like call of cthulu is very case based and if you have agreed to play the game then you the player have agreed you will take the hook. If you character would not do it then you should speak with the GM about either changing the character or making a new one.
Amen!
A DM should make sure the character have a reason to do something. But the players should also make sure they make a character that would get involved. They are both in the wrong. If the DM didn't give them an idea at all about what the idea of the RP is going to be back, they are in the wrong. But if the players knew and they went against and made a character that wouldn't get involved is their fault.
I read though the Op's post about the Forever DM he is just an ass who seems to enjoy having power over the players. This as done on purpose.
I disagree too. The issue CoC is that is set in the 20th century and you are player regular people. So calling the police is often a smart option. I haven’t played the game myself but I know from reading both Old Man Henderson and Puffin Forest videos that the way to avoid this is to have at least one player who is a police officer, detective, private eye or someone else who has a reason to get involved in dangerous situations that will occur. The issue is the DM has them all be average joes. Why wouldn’t they call the police in this situation? At best you are going to find yourself with a pair of cement shoes because the kidnapping was don by a mafia family.
@@iceman3317I think it is more on the DM I think he outlined they had to be college professors instead of letting them chose what their jobs were.
"Why would a professor get involved?"
Indiana Jones. Lara Croft. Nathan Drake. Sherlock Holmes.
Players and "Forever DM" were 100% in the wrong. They agreed to play, and then just didn't. Rude.
I wouldn't get "revenge", but I would also drop that game group. You don't sit down at a chess board after accepting a match, and then refuse to move a piece.
Only Indiana Jones is the comparison here, the rest aren't college professors. And he is a big exception to how they would behave 😂.
To be fair they ad professors also have alot of training Sherlock Holmes is also a detective not just a professor
@@Shade01982 I mean the point is that they have what are otherwise more mundane jobs (except Nathan Drake,) but tend to go on major adventures for less reasoning than the campaign
@@homerman76 Oh sure, that's definitely true, but those guys are still major exceptions to the rule. Adding that to the character would have provided the necessary flavor to make this story believable, instead of "Generic Professor 1".
But then why would you create a character who would actively avoid taking part in an adventure IN AN ADVENTURE GAME!
The 'Forever DM' was either angry at the poster for some unmentioned reason or they are just an A-hole, as that was clearly intentional sabotage.
Story 1: I feel that if you're going into an RPG as a player, it is your responsibility to create a character that would go on the sort of adventures that the GM is offering. Otherwise, what's the point of even bothering to show up to the game? You had might as well, play Skyrim, and spend the entire game drinking mead at the inn in Riverwood and chopping wood to pay for the mead.
It's also. I don't know how explicitly it was said in the story. But the fact the player who ruined it was refered to as 'the Forever DM' implies that this player is not as experienced with running games, since that player usually does it. And you can't expect an inexperienced GM to set up perfect plot hooks. Same as you can't expect new players to know all their abilities and use them well. Those are just eventualities you have to be ready for and willing to adjust for or, if need be, talk about.
The Forever DM essentially refused to do any of that. He judged the game as if he had prepared it, was unwilling to co-operate at all, and when directly approached to try and find a solution everyone may be happy with went "Nah".
THIS so much. I hate the idea that the game master not only has to prepare an entire adventure but also provide an explicit reason for every single player character to go through with it. Like, no bro, that's what backstories are for, and that's the player's job.
The only exception I'll make to this is for long campaigns since there's time to develop character motivations, but for the first few sessions or a one-shot, you shouldn't have to try and convince your players to actually play the game.
@@morrigankasa570nah, no matter what the hook is, you gotta try. Negotiate something.
@@morrigankasa570 he literally asked them for one task and they said no.
@@morrigankasa570 it's a call of Cuthulu game. They don't write their own backstories.
Wow man. I don't think I'd ever play with that Forever DM again. Straight up disrespectful.
legit. especially as a DM, youd think theyd know not to do that kind of thing
You want to know what the reason is? We're playing a game. A game that you're a cooperative player in. That's your reason.
For real. Maybe there's more context but this just sounds incredibly rude and like a deliberate sabotage attempt.
Oh, I would. And I'd go the sabotage route.
DM: "There's a dungeon just outside of town. It's probably full of monsters and treasure."
Me: "Oh, how horrible! I promptly go to the nearest town guard station and inform them of this terrible danger. I'm sure the proper authorities can handle this."
DM: "...you're not going into the dungeon? You're just going to stay here in town?"
Me: "Oh, yes! Most definitely! After all, I'm just a simple shopkeeper. Why would I involve myself in such things? Far too dangerous for me." And then I'd just *look* at him.
Yeah this forever DM is an ass if you actually read the ops post history. This Forever DM litterlerly killed the ending of a 2 year campaign by adding a sub BigBadGuy and making it so the players couldn't beat him even though they beat the original BigBadGuy. Then in rushed the DMs PC and a NPC to save the day. Trust me this forever DM did this on purpose.
Fun fact: I thought the first story would be about a player calling the police IRL to his GM's house. 😆
That happened in one really bad horror story.
@@emberfist8347Really? That's terrifying
Yeah I was hoping a cop might cast chain tazer on someone. lol
Me too lol
Yeah, that’s what I thought initially hearing the title that they got into some kind of real life argument/fight and the police showed up.
Or that the intro to the game was just so disturbing they decided the DM was in fact a serial killer or such.
First story is literally the horror of including the dm as a player. They're too used to driving the story. You have to be able to pull them to the side in the beginning and ask "Do you want to play this at all? No horror movie is set up around people who want to be there."
Or just have a better job at setting it up so it would be in character to have them follow the plot hook. Don’t make them all college professors have a cop or private eye in the group. Or just throw in something the police wouldn’t believe the party so that isn’t an option.
@@emberfist8347ok, but if the police are handling it, what is there for the players to do? Also, if the guy is saying, "I think I'd rather just quit," he's a bad player. Negotiate.
Obviously if you are being a college professor, you should be the sort of college professor that would follow down a winding path of a horror story. You wouldn’t go check with the wife of your colleague to check why he hasn’t shown up to work lately?
Or if they are so hellbent on "not our problem not our capability" even it is their close friend they could be suspected of being responsible of the professor's disappearance and they are just trying to make a cover up story so now they have to venture to clear their name and find their friend.
Because you know nothing motivates someone like being accused of a crime they didn't commit, but by that they upped the difficulty by 50% since now they has to go against eldritch horror and avoid authorities.
@@emberfist8347The DM set up a really cool and interesting campaign idea...but it's obvious that the forever DM just didn't want to play this game and just dragged his feet until they stopped playing. If he didn't want to play this then he should have said right from the start and not made the other DM waste his campaign on him. 😓
I just realized something, shouldn't her name be Dutchess, since your Duke?
*Wizard runs from incoming 1d4 pun-damage.
Lethal damage,I guess😂
Beat me to the suggestion
just had the same thought funnily :D
mmm i want to like but it’s at 69 so i’ll just comment
@@voidboi2831 same
For that first story, the Keeper should have just said to the forever-DM: "You're correct, your professor character needs some kind of reason to go investigate. So please come up with one so we can keep playing the game."
"it's what my character would do" is kindof bullsh!t in a one-shot imho, I get it if you're doing a multi-month campaign your character needs to be a character, a complete person and they need to be consistent, but you can't build that kindof character in a couple of hours
@@msihcs8171I think you can. A college professor isn’t normally going to do their own Miss Marple investigation. They would get a professional to do it. So have a professional be in the party.
@@emberfist8347 I mean, sure you can say that, it's one reason why I'm a little unsure if we're getting the full picture here. Typically a one-shot isn't going to have a Matt Mercer level of complete world. At some point players may need to just roll with it if they want to play a game. I kindof get the idea from the players responses that there's a lack of interest
@@emberfist8347There are college professors who ARE doing that. University in Arkham is even sending students to try to find out information about "unnatural" things. So yeah. Professors investigating what happened to their colleague is something that could have happened. Especially when police said that they won't do anything.
Also if you can't find a reason for a character that you will use ONCE and only ONCE in this oneshot campaign then you either need to get out of the table or change the character for him/her to have a reason.
@@jkgf4671 The campaign is set in New Orleans not Arkham.
That first story almost sounds like DM was playing his character like an NPC. But there's an element of wondering if they were just resentful they were not playing 5E.
On the second story: it's also kind of wild for the studio to be wanting a game for in-house benefits but expecting their EMPLOYEES to be the ones paying the "fair wage". If the higher ups believe this DM is worth "a fair wage" they should be the one paying it.
The forever pc just sunk the game, the Keeper had to say to the players ‘this is the game I prepared’ and the forever-DM said ‘I’d rather not play’. That’s rough. I don’t think the hooks and Keeper’s logic were so bad. At some points the players have to realize there is a game being played and it’s not real life lol. Imagine going to a friends house and behaving this way? I’d be mad, not embarrassed. :)
Agreed. The DM has to put a lot of effort into preparing a hook and a plot and adventure for the players to sink their teeth in. Sometimes, these ideas and plots aren't perfect, and it's fine for players to poke at it and challenge the DM to fill these plot holes, or admit they made a mistake and learn from it. But there's also the onus on the players to recognize a plot hook and be willing to take the bait. Play along.
You're all at that table to have fun. Don't do things that break your immersion for your own character, of course, but also recognize that you're there to experience an adventure.
It looks like he just said "screw it, i dont like you/what you made so i will ruin this game for you".
Yeah, it sounded to me like the pc’s didn’t build good characters for this story, if they have no incentive to pursue the game. That may also be on the dm, not working with them to create characters, but i’d expect the forever dm to know better and adjust on the fly. I mean that’s the main challenge of being a dm, rolling with pc decisions, one way or another.
Or, what I think is more likely, dm just didn’t wanna play. Really a shame we don’t get to know more about the other players, that’d make it easier to understand each person’s reasoning, and who should adjust their gameplay accordingly.
@DaTimmeh It sounds like the DM created the PC's though, not the players.
Yeah, it's sad when people are spinless in a group. Just one person needed to speak up
I think the Forever DM saying that infamous line is just him rubbing the salt in the wound, basically him just going, "Yeah I know what you're trying to get me to do but nah I'm not gonna play along." I mean seriously, if you have criticism of the DM's setup talk to them after the session is over and/or in private don't just be petty and ignore the game, that just hurts the DM running it and they'll more than likely not run that type of game with you again. And I do agree the DM running the CoC game should definitely NOT do that same thing back, that'll only end badly.
Specially as a DM, he should've know much better :/
"This is what my character would do", while derailing the campaign by doing so, is just a dick-move...
I wonder if the OP who was running the CoC one shot ever said that to the Forever DM during a session. As a Forever DM, they probably dealt with that line themselves at some point so I wonder why they would say that to OP knowing how much "It's what my character would do" can derail a game.
@@killer_rabbit42 Reciprocating pettiness goes nowhere except ruining any relationship you might have with the other person and the people around both parties. It doesn't matter who started it if you can't resolve your issues like adults, or at all, then it's time to part ways or minimize your interactions and definitely do NOT play TTRPGs together.
@@madwookie9844 I completely agree. I think pettiness is the wrong path to take in any situation.
I'm just wondering, since this is the internet & we don't have both sides of the story, if maybe the reason Forever DM did that to OP was because OP did that to them at some point.
For a Forever DM to do something like that seems odd to me because they would know that it could be disruptive to the game. The DM would know all about adventure hooks & clues to get things going & see what OP was trying to do. So where did saying that come from?
The only thing that makes sense to me is if OP said that to Forever DM & disrupted other games.
And I could be completely wrong about all of it, but that's my thought process on the situation.
@@killer_rabbit42 Fair enough
The forever-DM went out of their way to not play along and they ended up playing something else instead of DnD, which could have been what he was trying to do. In DnD, there's some expectation to play along with the story. While you could say that options sometimes arise that the DM needs to adapt to, this wasn't that. This was someone starting a video game and getting a game over because they chose to stay at home. If the forever-DM wanted to be difficult, they should have warned DM ahead of time so that they can prepare for someone dragging their feet at every turn (or maybe just kick them from the party 'cause that's obnoxious).
I think the forever dm was taking the opportunity to try and show how much better/smarter of a dm he is and how grateful they should be that HE usually ruins things.
I did a oneshot for my group, and our forever DM was so enthused he took all the hooks to the point of running into a Gelatinous Cube.
Yup, that's my style play. Things bogging down... do the dumb thing to let the dm move the story. "Role initiatives"
In the rare chances I get to play, dude I'm ALL IN. I'm looking for traps, I'm biting hooks like a trout, I'm RPing shopping.
It's weird to me that a "forever DM" gets a chance to play the game and just refuses to do so. Why agree to be a player if you're going to do that.
I swear I looked at your comment six times before I saw 'Gelatinous' instead of 'Gamecube'.
Like someone commented elsewhere, I wonder if the foreverDM just didn’t want to play CoC. And the other player saying his character wouldn’t think he was smart enough……. A college professor?? in that setting not having ego of being smarter than a policeman. Perhaps the OP should have had the cops insult the professor’s intelligence.
And the second story…. Yeah I don’t know anyone that’s going to sign up to pay for something with no information about what it is. “Anybody want to give me $25 for a box of stuff? No I’m not going to tell you anything about the stuff or the box it’s in”
I wish, my forever blew up my final boss fight by making a broken character, that killed him in one hit. He said it was to teach me to properly look at character sheets. I told him all he taught me was he was dick. I made the one shot in a week, and didn't have time to check his sheet. Ruined a perfectly fun night/one shot.
Moral of the story: ALWAYS side-eye corporate "fun activities" that fall outside of work tasks
6:40 Imagine adventurers who see zombies in the crypt for the first time and say "ok, this is not what I expected, I have a family to feed, I better go back to town"....
Ah shit, my character is like, desperately afraid of undead.
DM: what? The villain is a lich!!
@@username172that happened to me. I set up my character wanting nothing to do with pirates, then the gm said the group is going to a pirate run territory.
We agreed upon me running a temporary character.
@zombiebrainmuncher honestly, I'd try to play that character. Have a bit of an arc
Story 1: While sure, the dm should provide motive to their players, it's also on the players to be *receptive* to those motives. If the player is playing a character that wouldn't do the adventure stuff, then it's on them to make a character that *would* do adventure stuff.
I think it is on the DM for making them average college professors. If they had a cop or PI in the party from the start there would be no issue.
@@emberfist8347 Plenty of movies where a professor or researcher does their own investigation. indiana Jones and The Conjuring come to mind. If they can't do that for a one shot then they really need to get with the TTRPG program.
As someone totally outside of the TTRPG community, I agree that in a professional setting a GM should be paid, but NOT by the employees. If a business wants their employees to take part in something like this, then the business needs to pay the GM. In non-professional settings it would be nice if the others in the group chipped in (not mandatory) to help pay for any supplies they want. And this should all be discussed beforehand to avoid any weirdness.
Story #2 is genuinely horrifying to me and the epitome of everything wrong with 2020s society and humanity.
That having been said, you really should expect this type of behavior working in any sort of "artistic" field these days, if ya know what I mean.
Yea unless you and your friends pay for a professional dm for your own thing the job should pay
Exactly. I really think Duke and Duchess's success have blinded them to the regular TTRPG world.
If the DM says to you, in a meta sense, hey, this is it, if you don't go on this adventure, we are done playing, it is also on you to figure out why your character would go. Like at that point your character suddenly becomes a sherlock holmes fan and weirdly confident the books impart them with real detective skills or something.
We don't sit down to at the table to play one of the 1000 people who went to the police when they should, and then went about their boring lives. We sat down to play one of the 3 who didn't, and went on a crazy adventure.
There's a big difference between the mindset of people born in the late 20th century and early 21st century vs those born in the late 19th early 20th. When I was playing CoC it was set in the 1920's and there are some campaigns set in the 1890's There's a lot of documented police corruption in New York, Chicago, and LA during the early 1900's and I'm sure the same may be true in New Orleans. There are a lot of things that were done then that police absolutely can NOT do now. Warrantless searches, beatings, and no Miranda rights, it was a different time and if the players didn't try understand that then maybe CoC wasn't for them
@@TNJenni42 Nice to know, if I pick up CoC again, I might try to incorporate that, I didn't know it was that bad.
For the forever dm, the best solution could be that his profesor character leaves, and the Keeper proceeds to handle him a 'police detective' character saying: there, now YOU are the police, solve the case, and you would need the help of these profesors as consultants, which is usually done
Or have a cop or PI to begin with. The missing persons in New Orleans plot is probably from one of Lovecraft’s short stories where the protagonist was a cop.
The forever DM seems to have intentionally avoid the plot hook, and by the sounds of it, the group wanted to do D&D. This makes me think that the party wanted to do that instead.
Then why didn't they say so to the new D.M.? It's not hard to say "Hey, Call of Cthulhu isn't really my thing. Could we play 5e instead?" before the D.M. puts in hours of work into a game no one is going to enjoy or even want to participate in. Communication is key in these kinds of things.
@@sunshinegamer1981 Because they're a bad player. They CHOSE to torpedo the game instead of talking to them. I feel sorry for the DM that crafted the story and hope he finds a better group of friends to play with.
Seems to me that the Forever DM was perhaps that for a reason, he had no real interest in playing as a character and perhaps was actively seeking to tank the game so he could go back to DMing
I agree. The forever DM either had a beef with the OP and wanted to get revenge for all the times the OP said "That's what my character would do" or they just don't want to be a player and were sabotaging the game.
@@LeonardHarristhey definitely don't want to be a player. This is a dm that wants to be a dm for control. Look at op's previous posts, seemingly about this dm. One of them was even reviewed before, with "they all cast fireball".
@@narratornate8841 wait what? that was the same dm? 😂
I guess man, it’s at least clear they didn’t want to play. Way to ruin it for everyone else at the table 😒
Forever DM legit sat down to play an adventure game with no intent to adventure.
This is interesting because this week I played my first CoC game, which was also the first time my DM ran a CoC game.
In my personal opinion, it is _my_ responsibility as a player to make my character engaged in solving the mystery. If my character is not invested in the plot it is not because the DM failed to provide a proper hook, it is because I failed to give my character sufficient motivation.
The thing about CoC:
A typical Lovecraft story starts out as "this ain't a big deal, we don't need to call in outside help".
But then it rapidly develops into "oh my god, we cannot possibly tell anyone about this".
I think that's what the OP was trying to do here. He told the players "there is no indication of a crime" and "you're just trying to figure out what he might be up to".
If the players had ever gotten to the "unspeakable secret" part, then that would have been their motivation for pressing on.
But they didn't, because they simply refused to go along with the plot right off the bat.
Duke is now my therapist
Facts bro 😂
Mine is the appa plushie
First story: concern for their colleague was the motivation, motivation supplied. The only thing the GM might of done differently is explain the premise of Call of Cthulhu differently. "Regular folk get wrapped up in amateur detective work investigating the occult in a horror setting."
If you play D&D and you see some goblins raiding a caravan do you turn around and fetch the City Guard? That is what most characters should do; but the premise of D&D is you will fight them because you are an adventurer. In the same way the premise of Call of Cthulhu is you will investigate, not hire a detective (unless said detective is another player character then they will bring their clients along for no good reason).
Edit: The GM had great solutions for the police and PI and even explicitly stated the players need to be the investigators for the adventure to happen.
Dungeons and Dragons has players play experienced fighters who could handle goblins on their own. No need to get the city guard for that.
@@emberfist8347 no, it does not. You start off as a nobody with barely any skill and will get your ass wooped even by a peasant if luck isn't on your side.
@@MrJerichoPumpkin Except that is not true at all.
@@emberfist8347 dude, Call of Cthulhu is literally based off short stories that mostly involve amateur investigators diving into things for the sake of their own curiosity. If the Forever DM couldn't be bothered to engage in the world on its terms that's on him.
So the takeaways are communication is key, pettiness ruins friendships and dnd games, and Duke is our therapist!
So wife is not our therapist?
Duke is our therapist
Honestly, the first OP was very clearly laying out the hooks. CoC is supposed to be normal people and people on the edges of the occult being pulled into the deep end. Every opportunity was there. Forever DM was purposely avoiding every call, and OOC all but said he did not care about what the OP put forward. The college professors, given that a coworker went missing, might all be in the same department and thus would have interest in the artifact.
That isn’t stated by OP. The issue is OP set it in a city and didn’t have a cop as a PC. The one-shot has similarities to a short story from Lovecraft where the protagonist was a cop.
I really like Duke's horror stories, I watch a lot of horror stories on YT and often people just take 1 side and shit on the other like it's black and white. But Duke tries to understand both sides, analyze them what could be the cause and how to fix it instead "yeah this person is at fault"
story 1:
that's why the forever-dm, is still, forever, the dm.
That first story just sounds like the forever DM getting revenge 😂
"we have to keep everything secretive"
flashback to my first session of my current campaign where my DM wouldn't allow us to describe our characters once the first one of us had woken up (we were kidnapped), they just listed out our races as other people in the cell. I felt it really put me out to not get a chance to make the first impression on the group of what my character looks like.
I've never thought about DMs getting paid but it makes sense. A now-closed (thanks Covid) local game shop near my college had a "membership" fee that players had to pay after their second or third session in order to continue in the campaign. It wasn't a true membership fee but it helped cover the costs of keeping the shop open longer and paying the DM employee for DMing. They were super flexible with it because they knew most of us were broke college kids who couldn't pay bunch of money, especially all at once, so you could do a payment plan where you paid a little at each session. They let you get a couple of free sessions so you could decide if you wanted to be in the campaign, and IIRC, brand new players (never played before kind of new) may have gotten one more free session or a reduced fee or something like that. I miss that shop.
Yeah, I totally agree with DMs getting paid if they're doing it professionally. If it's like you and your buddies running a game in your basement every Friday night, then I think it's a little more nuanced and definitely requires a discussion amongst the group
The problem is, literally *everything's* pay to play these days. Where does it end? And if I'm being forced to pay for things I did for free for decades, then I should have certain privileges to go along with that and if I don't get those privileges then I'm out. For example, I'm no paying just to have my PC killed off in the first or second sessions, just like I'm not paying to use a formerly free website just to have what I say censored. Screw that.
Regarding story one: Part of the whole "it's what my character would do" has to include aligning your character with the genre in play. In real life, sure a college professor would start out by going to the police or hiring a PI, but in the whole murder mystery turned cosmic horror that lovecraft inhabits, of course the professor has to go looking for the missing person himself: that's just what people do.
If players reject the trope of call to adventure remember there's also "the call won't take no for an answer" and "the call knows your address"
the CoC one, i feel that just because they were college professors, it felt very nit picky of the "forever DM" to do what he did, it's like me being a Farmer and being attacked, some people grab any kind of weapons they can find to defend their lands, and then i go "no no, i'm a farmer, i do not fight, i farm" it's just Dumb. He was being a nit picky petty bastard, and the other 2 seemed to be the classic Sheep, someone "takes charge" and they follow and agree without any input of their own.
The DM was clearly trying to set something up and the FDM was honestly being a c*nt, plain and simple. Be a good player and just roll with it, don't use that "it's what my character would've done" BS.
Cause i've Always hated that "it's what my character would do" okay, i kill your MC for the story because "it's what my character would do" GTFO with that excuse.
And as for Duke's and Wife's response of reasoning, that feels way too...Educated of a response.
It's like one of those moments where a School Bully must've had a rough childhood, has trouble at home and such, or Maybe, they're Just an a**hole, plain and simple.
People tend to confuse a persons reasoning with an excuse that makes the behavior okay. The fact that many bullies used to be bullied themselves, explains why they do it, but doesn’t make it right. And yeah, the way duke and wifey(duchess) explained themselves it came across as the latter.
Call of cthulu story: I feel like the forever DM become immediately the ahole in the scenario when OP was honest and expressed that it would end the story that they put a lot of work into. I feel like after that, you're just being a bad player.
I would have loved to play that first campaign. The concept tickled my brain and I love the mystery. College professors aren’t just boring nerds, they’re excited nerds who are incredibly passionate. They’d jump on the case and explore it, and would probably try to take their expertise and see who can solve the mystery first, even if they work together. That seems like a perfectly logical campaign idea, and it was beautifully crafted. I feel horrible for that DM.
Story #1: If you as a player control a character, it's your job to play them in a way that makes them stand out. If you just play them to fit in, you are controling an npc and therefore aren't a player participating in the game but a little helper for the DM...
It is very nice to see a RUclipsr give an opinion or react series that sees all sides and isn’t super quick to judge. You really weighed the options and gave it a good objective look. As always, you’re the best ❤
Honestly, I was expecting they went full "Karen" & actually called the police on the DM.
I haven't actually heard of that happening, but I've gone deep enough into the "DM Horror Story Rabbit Hole" to at least know it's not impossible.
I could swear I saw an RPG horror story video years ago where one player actually did escalate things to the point where yes, the rest of the group really did have to call 911.
Man, that first story gets me. No one sits down to play chess and then instead commits to an intense diplomatic back-and-forth with their opponent in order to prevent hostilities.
Like... I'm sorry, but if I sit down to a game of Call of Cthulu, my character is gonna solve crimes and delve into insanity, not play a completely different game by calling the cops and ending it all there. I feel like there was more going on with that "forever DM," because the forever DMs I know personally wouldn't purposefully start playing Diplomacy when given the chance to play Chess, so to speak.
The forever DM was really trying to make the campaign something completely different.
The one who charged 50$/week who would have been getting 550$/week if everyone else played didn’t know much about DMing and seems like that’s not a hot take. Because of this however he shouldn’t price himself as gold. I remember when it said that 25$/week would be roughly his pay but they failed to remember dnd is meant to be fun for all parties and that you aren’t spending 8 hours a day working on this campaign.
Well, imo, for 25$ for session, he should bring a lot to the table, like unique miniatures, detailed map and etc.
For all you know he would have we don't know
what I found a bit odd, is that they expected to be paid for the session zero, upfront on top of that. I know someone who used to give language courses, and the first course was always free, so you knew what to expect if you want to stick to it.
@@delfinenteddyson9865 Yeah... that sounded like some scam to me.
If someone is making TTRPG session a product with a price tag there needs to be some 'sample' or 'disclaimer' to what was to be expected.
Basic stuff like what system is going to be played is first thing anyone that is into rpg will ask.
Two thoughts: perhaps Forever DM was getting revenge on exasperating behavior the current DM exhibited as a player. Second, perhaps there is a reason why Forever DM was mandated to Forever and should never be a player.
Love these segments. Keep them coming!
As for the first case, there exists a certain social contract when people play any game. In TTRPGPs, is shouldn’t solely land on the DM’s shoulder to give a motivation to play, because the games is for everyone’s enjoyment. The players should be willing to bend a little to give their characters a motivation to go on an adventure and to continue the game.
The forever DM in the first one was definitely in the wrong
They definitely knew what they were doing and it sounds like the other players just followed along with them because they took the lead
The OP set everything up for the game and the Forever DM instead of just going with it for the sake of the game and progression compelty railroaded the whole game and totally did it on purpose
I would never play with that group again
I agree. They knew what the game was, and deliberately joined to refuse to play.
Time to find a new game group.
I disagree the OP got way to railroady. The first mistake was making them all professors.
@@emberfist8347 depends on who created the PCs. even in that case, though - as an experienced DM wouldn't you be able to instantly see that these characters wouldn't take the hook? why not just SAY SO and sort it out BEFORE the game started? why wait and be disrespectful to the DM and waste everyone's time?
@emberfist8347 I'm not very knowledgeable in dnd and stuff, but isn't this a pre-made game? So they wouldn't have made their characters?
@@TheHuneyAnimator No this was a one-shot by the Keeper.
It's Call of Chuthulu!! Of course you jump and become a detective, even though you are professors!! That is the whole setting. I think the OP did great and the forever DM was being a total punk.
The forever DM should be able to come up with a reason to play along with the story, they're a DM. They were either just trying to make someone else feel like how they feel when people don't play along with them, or they're just being a jerk.
I absolutely disagree that the forever dm wasn’t in the wrong in the first story, they decided to ruin that game and the dm tried multiple times to fix it and they didn’t stop
The first one is rough. Imagine doing a rescue mission campaign only to have someone go “Well, actually, my PC already works a 9-5 at the town’s inn so he won’t have time to go. Sorry, he’s a very hard worker so that’s just what he’d do.”
Shoulda had the players switch to playing the private detective/police if the college professors aren't gonna get in on the access.
But I hate "It's what my character would do" lines. That sounds like traveling hate to me.
Brennan is a full transparency DM? Nice. I don't watch online D&D content generally, but glad to know someone popular shares my ideology on this.
Yeah, but you would probably have someone trying to kill the PCs in that situation like most Keepers. Unlike "a workmate is missing", "someone is trying to murder us" actually works pretty well to motivate most players. And if it doesn't after a few attempted murders and the PCs still ignore it, you can always have the cultists kill them, at least it will make you feel better.
Anyone who ever watched a horror movie should know that going to the cops only makes things worse, even "if that is what my character would do".
Reward your players when they do something smart, punish them if they do stupid shit.
But sure, when they went to the detective you could also just take one of the players character sheets and tell him to make the detective instead. The former PC turned NPC is a perfect murder victim so the other players realize they need to help or die.
@@loke6664or just have them do what OP suggested and have a PI/cop in the party. Going to the cops is actually smarter in this situation because the stereotype the cops only make things worse in horror films isn’t completely true. The general is the horror is supernatural so the cops don’t buy it. More mundane horror films like Scream, the original Black Christmas, or The Terminator (yes it is science fiction but the Terminator was deliberately made to contrast supernatural slashers by looking normal and using guns), the cops do believe the characters. The missing person is a mundane thing the police handle regularly. And that is discounting the various horror films where a cop is the protagonist like Halloween 2018, Psycho, the original Child’s Play, Jaws, or Silent Night, Deadly Knight. So a cop in the party is the best solution.
@@emberfist8347 A PI or the Campus security guard would work but cops can not do a kidnapping investigation together with random civilians.
The Campus security guard really make most sense since he can be friends with the other PCs and he could be a former cop who got fired for something so he can have the skills the players need.
While going to the cops make sense from the characters point of view, letting the cops actually believe them and taking the case will either mean that you are leaving a large part of the investigation (or basically the module) to NPCs or you need to complicate things a lot by figuring out a plausible reason for the cops involving the players.
I assume the module was written so that the investigation itself was the important thing with the clues and maps the Keeper had done, if the cops actually takes the case then the session would be the players sitter and sipping tea in the teachers lounge the entire session.
So yeah, the cops need to act like the stupid or evil cops in most horror movies, or just plain incompetent and ignoring all the clues (like assuming it was communists who are the kidnappers or something).
I have to say that in the first case ,the CoC one-shot, Trail of Cthulhu solve this in a way that every charactar has a huge incentive to follow this person, vengeance, power... is always something personal that should be followed by the character because is what they are. Also is worth mentioning some people only want to play 5e...
I'd be p*ssed at Forever DM! I would have picked up my stuff and walked out. I've play antagonistic players, but not to the point that I've shut down the game. I'm there to play.
As for paid DM?
That is totally up to the individual. I personally would not.
I'm wondering if the higher up was looking to take a cut?
In regards to story 1: I'd have the say that the Forever DM definitely meta-gamed it. From what the story says the reason he wanted to go to the police or call 911 was because this was dangerous and he didn't think his character would get involved with it. From what the OP said all they knew right now was that the other professor was missing. Up to that point, the OP hadn't described anything that gave even a hint of danger so why would he instantly be wanting to call the police? I've been a player in some of those types of campaigns, it starts off where you're not thinking anything nefarious has happened you just start looking for your friend, and by the time the first hint of actual danger occurs it's to late for you to turn back. It sounds like the Forever DM was jumping forward to the first hint of danger and immediately calling the cops before there was any in-game preventing that action.
First story: God I can't defend the Forever-DM. You don't agree to play a game and then not play the game. It's like booting up GTA and just mowing your lawn and doing legit jobs. I don't understand how none of the players decided to be the instigator and draw the other players into it. I don't agree that no one was in the wrong. You are there to play a game, being petty and not playing the game is not ok.
Second Story: I agree some DMs should be paid or tipped or whatever, because like they said, you only get so many hours in a day and you have to cut into something to DM. Though with no info on the game and no advertising of what the game even is. The higher ups are also just stupid.
The thing about CoC vs 5E is CoC is a *very* different experience. Liking one game doesnt necessarily mean you're going to enjoy the other. I personally dont care for CoC's system, but I enjoy when I get to play it with my friends because they make it fun.
In the first story though it sounds like they didn't even want to give the system a chance. Or at least the forever DM didn't and the other players maybe followed his lead because of his DMing experience. I hope OP tried the campaign again with a group that does have CoC experience and created something horrifying out of it
Instructions unclear: Duke is now kicking me and throwing plushies at me as I'm trying to tell him why I have trouble talking to people
That forever DM was just not interested in playing if he makes a character that doesnt want to be an investigator
The worst thing about tabletop games is other people.
They will constantly disappoint you.
Well, I can certainly tell why Forever-DM in story 1 is a forever DM. Geez I really hope OP turned it right around on his ass by doing the same thing when he's back in the DM chair.
Story 1: I got the feeling that OP and forever DM have some form of history or problems etc, because he really focused on the FDM and barely said anything about the other 2 at the table, it's not like the other two are npcs they have thier own agency and choose to go along with forever DM and yet OP solely focuses on the one guy and instead talking about all three of them.
Story 2: Jesus christ this sounds like a shit place to work tbh
I've noticed that forever DMs have a bad tendency to not engage with the plot because "Why would I?" or "It's what my character would do." My forever DM played in two games I was in, and in both of them he played characters that actively refused to engage with the plot, which wouldn't have been quite so bad had he not become group leader in one of those games, meaning we couldn't engage if he wouldn't. The first character was a mercenary who was unwilling to take any job he thought he might struggle with and was consequently given a job he would struggle with, and the other character was a druid who outright ran away from most combat encounters despite being our healer because "he wasn't a fighter" despite the other party members being frontlines so he wouldn't have to engage in combat.
He dropped out of the first game because we eventually decided to engage the plot without him, and he ended up making a new "dumber" (his words, not mine) character for our second game since we were dissatisfied with him mistaking cowardice for wisdom.
I now officially expect Duke to solve my psychological problems 😂
I'm not expecting, I'm demanding. Furthermore, I'm demanding it yesterday.
"It's what my character would do." This is a line given by players to absolve themselves of accountability for their actions and choices, blaming it on an imaginary character.
The response is "you are in total control of your character. You decide who your character is, what your character feels, and what your character would do. If you created a character for a role playing game based on investigation in a Lovecraftian world, and created that character to be a character that wouldn't engage in investigation in a Lovecraftian world, that is what *you* did. Because your character is make believe. It doesn't have any agency. Only you do."
I now get why people say "No DnD is better than bad DnD."
1st story sounds like the group just didn't want to play CoC. CoC has a VERY different tone than DnD. In DnD, you start out as semi-heroic characters, even at level 1. CoC characters are essentially average joes. The PCs in DnD ARE the best people for the job. In CoC, the PCs are generally NOT well equipped to deal with what is going on.
I have played Mansions of Madness, and most of those scenarios start with, "you agreed to help look for a missing person after the authorities were unable/unwilling" or "you were invited to X location and weird stuff starts happening", just to avoid these problems.
At 6:40 her glasses cause an optical illusion where a sizable portion of her face COMPLETELY disappears. Its great.
It looks like she's short sighted
Wait, is this gonna be a new thing?
Because... I am loving it!
To the first one:
If "what your character would do" does derail the whole adventure, your character is just noz suitable for this adventure. It is that easy sometimes ^^'
Call of Cthulhu is all about non-fighter characters in an extremly dangerous setting, even if they don't get to see that untill it is too late. They are not supposed to fight often, they are supposed to do detective work and even encouraged to run away from monsters rather than actually fighting them. The DM of this campaign did sound like he did all he could in in setting up an interessting game and the forever-DM just derailed it on purpose...
Those college professors were all good friends with the missing one. So this should be reason enough to at least investigate a little, when the police is unwilling to help.
Now to the second one:
Not even telling the system or setting is just dumb. How could the players prepare in any way for session 0? And that he feared about his intellectual property... like... what? Is he okay?
Taking money for DMing is a choice. I think it is even valid, to take some money, from people you don't actually know at all, to be honest. After all, you do put alot of work into it and if it is not for friends, than it is just work like any other. And stuff like subscriptions for virtual TTRPG pages for more and better functions also is not free. But 25$ per player and week (which it was in the first post)... that is alot. And yeah... rising that up to 50$... heck no.
That art studio is like... really weird to say the least. I imagine some old ass people beeing the higher ups, who don't even understand art...
I disagree with the first one. Ignoring the cosmic horrors these aren’t detectives why wouldn’t they go to a professional?
@@emberfist8347 Because the usual reaction of the professionals is: "Nah, they just ran away, we will not investigate." ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
And you can extend that in this setting even more, because the supernatural nature gives those professionals often even more reasons to just don't do their job.
@@Drako999x When I say professional I mean a cop or private eye someone who is trained to discover suspicious things and do missing persons cases.
@@emberfist8347 Yeah, I know. And I was commenting on that. Cops and such in the CoC setting are even less good at their job than real ones :/
Story 1: Doesn't matter what the Plot Hooks were or what system it is. Its up to the PCs to take the bloody Plot Hooks. The plot cannot begin, if they just decide "No, I'm doing this instead."
And I'm talking about Session 1 here. Players are fully able to deny Plot Hook in a campaign and craft their own adventures and plots...but not at session 1. The story has to begin somehow. At least for Session 1, Players should follow the plot the DM made, just so the world can be fleshed out more, NPCs can be made, locations explored and fleshed out.
If I sat down and agreed to play Curse of Strahd, and Session 1, I say "No, my character isn't going to Barovia because he's sat at home in Waterdeep" then why dafuq did I agree to Curse of Strahd, when I made a character, who will never experience the adventure? The entire plot of the adventure, hinges on being taken to Barovia, and denying that denies the game
As for Call of Cthulu, thats a system where you're always playing as a regular human. Its not like D&D where PCs are Mages and Swordsmen and Kung Fu Masters who reasonably accept the risk of danger cause they can handle it. In Call of Cthulu, you kinda have to suspend your disbelief as to why regular people decide to go down the cosmic horror rabbit hole cause they'll never realistically be able to handle it, but they have to go for it for the plot to exist
That forever DM just likes being contrarian. Or enjoys feeling superior, so he's nitpicking stuff and trying to force the DM to do things his way (oh, that's not a good enough motivation, come up with something better, or I'm not gonna play). Sure, the personal stakes weren't there but the players could've easily come up with something thrmselves (fe Oh no, that professor was my friend/lover/relative, I have to find them).
You agreed to play this RPG, only to go 'nevermind, this isnt good enough for me, I'm out' before even playing, which is a dick move.
I totally agree. The PCs have to do some of the work too. There is no way a DM can drum up enough motivation if the PC won't work with it.
The players knowing they are the main characters is still pretty important for the whole thing. The party I DM for is, without a doubt, completely disfunctional in any non-game setting. Only half of them would ever agree to work together, and the other half would probably kill each other and half of a town while they are at it. But because they know they are players and they are a group, they get their asses together to continue the whole thing. Some of them split off to do their own things every now and then, but they always come back willingly because they very much know what they are supposed to do.
They needed more to go after the missing professor, for sure... that being said a missing person report was almost never taken seriously 40 years ago, especially if it was an adult.
Also though it's on the party to make characters what would heed that call, I'm a bit surprised you had even a little bit of that take just specifically since one of the players usually DMs, sounds like the guy just didn't want to play Call of Cthulu.
Re DMs getting paid: I think that there could be situations where it would be logical for players to pay a bit to the DM. I'm thinking mostly of sharing the costs a DM might make. Like if they have to pay money to print their maps, buy minis or whatever (maybe even some compensation for their time). The entire group pitching in to cover costs a DM makes seems perfectly reasonable. However, charging a flat rate wouldn't sit right with me. At least as long as it's an informal game with a group of friends. If you're hiring someone to DM because nobody in your groups wants to it's another matter.
It seems to me that not only did the other players not understand the type of game COC is but the FOREVER GM was trying to insert D&D logic to a supernatural style game where the goal of the Characters is to investigate these things lol Before you ever have any group begin a game they have never before played you need to introduce the idea and concepts behind the game. Like another game PARANOIA which the primary goal of the game is to have you limited number of clones all find the most impressive or amazing why to die. Most games your goal is to survive lol but not all games.
I played COC and my character was possessed by an ancient which and the GM took me aside and told me I was dead and the Witch was inside my body. SO i had to role play as the witch pretending to be me and slowly kill off the party.
D&D is a very limited game and there are so many amazing other games with far better systems and concepts.
Strongly disagree with the take on the first story. It was a one shot, what level of hook are you expecting? It is no different than a toddler throwing his plate on the floor because his chicken nuggets aren't dinosaur shaped. That's fine when I'm dealing with my 4 year old nephew, my 18 year old nephew pulls that crap and he's getting called out on it. It essentially boiled down to the statement "you didn't custom design this one shot campaign close enough to the character backstory I gave you (based on personal experience likely the day before the campaign started) and expected ME to put forward effort to engage in the game, so screw you I'm not going to play until you improv one right now."
4:51 WHY DID HE EVEN SHOW UP XD Was bro wanting to get some sort of revenge for all the "work" he did before?
As a DM who was a forever DM for a long while, nah, fam. It's very well-known in this community now that the 'it's what my character would do' can only go so far, especially if it's preventing anything in the story from happening. If the DM didn't create a 'big' enough reason for you to go, you make one for yourself if you want to play (i.e. paranoia that you'll be the next target due to the missing person being in your circle, you becoming too curious like a cat at what is happening, make a reasonable backstory on the spot and asking the DM if it's okay to have this character motivation). Not to mention, this is a One-Shot, meaning there is the expectation to grab the hook (especially since the new DM SPECIFICALLY told them this IS the hook) and play the game, even if it means they have to use suspension of disbelief. If this was a long-term campaign, that's a different story.
Okay Forever DM, roll up a Police Detective, since Prof Boring is obviously staying home. OR, have the police be clueless and ask the players for help with the clues, so the players have the police prompting them to solve stuff, and even have the cops do the legwork until the feces hits the oscillating device.
As for the 'pay to play', I feel like the first time it seemed like a trick situation, like buying someone a drink at the bar, they go home with you, and then at your house start mentioning prices... you feel like "dude, I thought you were inviting me to game, not trying to charge me" the second time though, it sounded like they were hiring the guy, so, yeah, in the second instance the GM wasn't the bad guy.
I still can't believe Duke managed to convince someone to marry him, and a cute and funny doctor no less. What's your secret, Duke?!
Why wouldn't Duke be able to convince someone to marry them? He's an amazing person.
It's the dance moves.
I never understood the point behind agreeing to spend your free time playing a ttrpg and then doing everything in your power to NOT play the campaign set by the DM.
Hi Duke and hi Wife. Hope everything is going good
Sounds like the Forever DM from the first story was a Forever DM for a reason.
yes hello Wife and Duke
I very much like how ya'll play devil's advocate. I've had so many experiences where people put in their opinion, say that the favored side is wrong and bad, throw around some slurs and accusation, and call it "advocating for both sides", but you guys provide a rare semi-balanced approach.
You know what with the 1st story it sounds like a great start for a Indiana Jones type of DnD
I have heard CoC also has a more Indiana Jones-esque series of games for folks who do want to play a game like that.
I do hate that DND is the go to
Loved the commentary!
That CoC game, the Forever DM sabotaged the game, because he knew the others would follow his lead.
Comment for the Cthulhu player: there is an easy way to gently nudge your Forever DM out of his "I'm used to being in control and the center"; make the clues somehow converge on the DM's character to make HIM look like the guilty party. All of a sudden, mr "It's above my pay grade" would become, mr. "My fat is in the frier," and we all know how easy it was back in the day to peg a murder on an innocent person and send him off to "the chamber," as it were. Best part is, the more he tries to prove his innocence, the crazier he looks to law enforcement. Insanity IS, after all, the plot of the game, right? "Not guilty by reason of insanity" is always a safer bet than "the chair", anyway.
I know nothing about DnD but I thought and felt DM (with the Chuthulu quest) handled it perfectly. Too bad it didn't lead any further...
This was awesome. As a DM I like to have like a beginning and premise of a campaign as well as an end picked out but I like to grow the campaign with player feedback where I change the story based on how the players react to it even the ending being up for change. I like to reveal bits and pieces of the world before the campaign and tell the players the DCs they need to beat and such because I find that they and I find it much more fun that way.
Yeah, that's what I call bad faith role playing in that first game. The whole point of the game is to go investigate and explore and adventure. If you as the player can't imagine your character doing that, you've done a bad job as a player. Not every plot hook is gonna be great but at some point you need to actually ENGAGE with the premise. I absolutely feel the forever DM was completely in the wrong.
Re: the first story, we hear a lot of stories about players nervously taking to DMing for the first time, but I don't hear a lot of dialogue about forever-DMs shaking off the dust to play and having to acclimatise to that. It kind of occurs to me that I think I've come across this sort of thing more than once, with the DM committing HARD to playing a character even if it isn't condusive to telling a story, or otherwise not really having a sense of how to play nice as a party member. Food for thought!
Love the Appa blanket! 😊
I felt like the first story, the forever DM sabotaged the game on purpose to make the new DM look like a fool.
First story; the party seemed to just not be interested in a CoC like game. They were probably used to and really enjoyed more combat heavy games. Also, I think a way of remedying the forever DM's refusal would is to have like a half hour of RP with the missing professor before he goes missing and make him the type of character that they would want to go looking for. Then again, he probably played with groups that took the hook immediately, so I don't think he was prepared for them to just go their own way.
Second story; I'm not against paying DMs, but I feel like he was charging too much. I would have lowered the price a bit; since this wasn't a game among friends (for which I do think it should be free, but also have more theater of the mind than set pieces), I think 15 dollars would be good. Also, keeping everything secret is weird. If there's a mystery, like I'm DMing the Strixhaven campaign, so I'm only giving drips and drops of info about the big bad, and they know nothing about his orb yet (they're in third year). But, they knew from the start, this is a magical college, your characters are together because they're roommates, here's all the information your characters would have, do this role, it's going to be at around this difficulty (when I don't out right tell them the number they have to role), etc. I want to start a homebrewed game pretty soon, and I have a homebrewed one shot. The campaign takes place in a fantasy world where there are such and such nations/city-states/empires/tribes, you're members of an adventurers' union, and you get your various jobs from the union hall. The one shot, you're a band in a battle of the bands, and it's heavily influenced by Hanna/Barbara cartoons (mostly Scooby-Doo and similar ones). You're just outside of New Orleans in the late 1960s, and the game is being held at this elf's mansion right on the Bayou.
The hire-ups were being dick-holes. If someone doesn't want to buy your product, you can do one of two things and still be in the right. 1. Ask them why. 2. Ignore them. They chose the most dickish option of berating them.
I know this is 11 mon ths old but in regards to the first story the Keeper did nothing wrong. There's a few important things to note
1) This was a oneshot, in a oneshot you either follow the quest outlined or you dont play. If you come across the spooky castle and dont go inside then nothing happens.
2) this was Call of Cthulhu which is very noir/detective based. CoC is all about investigating weird stuff, its roots are so linked into detective stories that one of it's most famous modules is called Horror on the Orient Express (like Murder on the Orient Express) when you play Call of Cthulhu you are signing up to investigate stuff.
3)The missing NPC was a colleague and friend of the PCs they did have a reason to investigate. Sure you or i in basic common sense would go 'nope im saying away' but again Call of Chulhu, PCs dont have self-preservation instincts if they did then they wouldnt be PCs.
For the first story: Fully on the forever DM. Suspend your disbelief for the one shot. Your character doesn't need to be believable. What a tool.
Its always fun to watch dukes material hes helped me figure out how to he a better GM... though im failing but I can always come back for more of his video so thats a plus!