Kelly, I was sad to see on Instagram that you lost your Mom. I've been down that road. Hang in there and try to remember the good days and not the last ones. Time will help.
You could’ve taken time brother, we who love you and can understand some things take serious time. I’m sorry for your loss brother. Thank you for everything.
I’m sorry for your loss, I lost my mother 12 years ago. It’s OK to not be OK right now, and there is no time limit for the grieving process. Your mother’s legacy will live on in you.
Agreed. Lost my mother without warning 2 years ago, and when it first happened I was broken. Luckily, with the help of friends, family, and a bit of hobbying, I was able to pull through in the end. Here’s hoping Kelly can make it through this trial of his, too.
Another bad behaviour: refusing to lose. The player who tries something - usually takes a while to explain - but after a roll or two it fails and they say, “Actually then I won’t do that. My character would know it wouldn’t have worked. Instead, I will…” Takes up so much time and also isn’t fun since they have no tolerance for loss.
wouldnt rolling a dice indicate an action took place? i feel like rolling dice means your swinging your sword or blasting a spell. you cant redo a missed swing so why allow the PC to reroll a different scenario? idk i dont play DnD im just a poser.
@@shmoga Sure, but such players are experts at phrasing things in a way where they get as much as they can for free, so to speak. “If I walk over there… and if I then did this, because of this… would I then?” And, of course, that means they have basically implied doing a lot already and if it doesn’t work they dismiss the entire thing as just hypothetical and argue they didn’t really do it.
@@HorizonOfHope i guess dont follow how you allow that to happen. are they discussing how to play the game, or are they just pretending to play the game? cant you just say "good thoughts, what are you going to do?"
Kelly mentioning how failure can be just as fun as success is very timely, as it reminds me of something that just happened in my game last night. The PCs stumbled across some fey creatures who demanded that the PCs do something to entertain and delight them; my plan was that if the PCs described something sufficiently entertaining (perhaps with appropriate skill checks) then the fey would bestow some blessings on them. So the players described how they put on a show illustrating the great battle they had just fought earlier... and proceeded to miserably fail all their skill checks at it. They decided on the spot that their attempt to put on an epic show ended up coming across as slapstick comedy. The fey loved it, had a good laugh, and gave the PCs their blessing.
honestly, failing is usually way more fun and memoriable , for example, without spoilers im running drakkenhiem, and me and my players are usually crying with laughter becuase of how bad its going, they just got to level five i think we are at like 10 deaths now, and we are all loving the campaign
this is my biggest gripe with baldurs gate 3 being a pseudo d&d simulator, it simply does not even try Failure = different story, and instead just denies the player their prize
DM keeps beating my character over the head with info that her father figure is the bad guy. Character doesn't want to believe it. Roll insight- nat 1 with a -1 modifier. "Yeah, this guy is lying. He would never do that"
I made a druid with the idea that I would be the stealthy scout via wildshape for the party. When a new player joined our party as a rogue, it was a struggle sometimes. The rogue is supposed to be the stealthy scout, but in many cases the druid can do it better. You don't want to take away from another player's strengths and overshadow them. So I started proposing to cast pass without trace and then (moon druid) bonus action into a small innocuous form to ride on the rogue's shoulder. With their high dex and expertise and the +10 I give them, it pretty much guarantees they succeed. But sometimes there are places they can't get to, which they can tell me to look into in wildshape form. So we both get to be the scout, but when our powers combine, we're like the uber scout. It is still a work in progress. But to fit into the video... Let the rest of the party play to their strengths. Build them up, don't make them feel inadequate because your uberleet optimized badass is prepped to solo the whole damn thing. Nobody likes a Mary Sue.
i can relate to that with my currently played gnome artificer ( with the scholar/researcher background ) in a group with 2 wizards. one of them just plainly doesn't care about backgrounds or active participation in table role playing, but the other IS my problem. He thinks, he is the only legit source of academic information and i have no input into knowledge skill tests, even when our group has a library to its disposal and that it IS my specialty to rumage through tomes and scrolls to find the hint, we are looking for. The same player had an elven druid in our last campaign, but never used any druidic special features, when he got the "Oathbow" very rare magic weapon at character creation ( i very much blame the DM for this and the rest of our group sided with me, because ) and then just plainly played a worse ranger ( of cause taking Elven Accuracy, Sharpshooter cheese feats, but constantly cussing about only having one attack each turn...
I have a duo that's similar (rogue and spore druid) and aside from what you describe, the druid wanted to help pick a lock by becoming a roach and creeping into the lock to guide the rogue's tools. It was a very cool moment.
One of the most frustrating things I’ve ever encountered (as a DM), is I was transitioning a group from a home brew one shot, over to Ravenloft. I ended the session with a description of an area they ended up with, and a player who’d already played Ravenloft spoke up “that’s not at all how the adventure starts”……
OH MY GOD I hate that shit "Modrons don't act that way" "Doesn't make sense that Iarno is from Phandalin" "Um, goblins don't normally get that bonus action do they?" In my game, THEY DO.
@thetowndrunk988 that is just poor show from the player, I am running it for the 3rd time now and I have changed it nearly everytime on how they get there ^^ Edit: I meant for 3 different groups but for the same group I would 100% change it up
@@thetowndrunk988better to cut it right off by saying you'll play it your own way and won't follow the book exactly. And also mention if he starts metagaming the adventure you won't appreciate it.
While in concept it makes sense, if you think about it for more than 1 second, it stops. We know about weaknesses of vampires due to how easily accessible media is in our day and age. Internet, movies, TV, books (for those that still read them) and word of mouth in a time when going outside of city boundaries doesn't carry the danger of being attacked by monsters. In the world of D&D, which is typically medieval, the only media accessible to an average person is word of mouth, with books being reserved for higher echelons of society and plays being a paid commodity, in addition to word of mouth being very easily removed by the fact that every time you leave your town/village, you might not survive. So no, a lot of people *wouldn't* know how to stop Regeneration of certain monsters because the way information travels is NOT quick or reliable in D&D settings
@@jpjfrey5673 thats not accurate. i would argue that we knew about vampire weakness long before modern media. There are literally real life examples of villages staking corpse cause they thought people were coming back as vampires because of how decomposition works. (I.e. bloating and red fluids leaking from nose and mouth)
@@jpjfrey5673Yea but vampires and werewolves are not **common** encounters yet folklore of their weaknesses is widespread. So it also makes sense that even though a troll isn't a **common** encounter, peasants would still know how to fight one.
The one thing I did in my first and ongoing campaign is I said "When you guys encounter a monster if it's common knowledge I will tell you "you see a Troll" or "You see a Yeti" and that's the cue that your characters will know what that is. If I describe but don't name the creature that's the cue that you might not know what it is and I might allow an appropriate skill check to allow you to see if you have knowledge of the creature. I did this when my players encountered a Wyvern but given the setting one player said "It sounds like a pterodactyl" out of character.
Pretending to not know that a vampire needs to return to his coffin or that a black dragon breathes acid is more trouble than it's worth. And then it just produces a different exercise in meta gaming where players are trying to come up with a reason for their characters to know the out of game knowledge. Imo it adds nothing to the game and is more trouble than it's worth. The description method can work however, along with mixing in variant monsters.
@@TA-by9wvit's REALLY not that hard, dude. 😂 Like you work off of what your character can know. Easy example with another property, if a pokemon trainer sees a Charmander it's easy to guess based on their fiery tail that they're a fire type. It's a whole other thing to be like "if the flame on its tail goes out it dies! At this level the possible moves it can know are X, Y, and Z!! It has this many points in DEF!!! etc.
I've taken the same approach with some one-shot adventures. I threw a bodak at a level 7 party but just described it instead of saying what it was. They only began to suspect it was a bodak after the half-orc totem warrior went down in round 1!
Not playing collaboratively... Reminding me of an awful group way back in 3.5 edition... they treated my character as a utility, and when he died, they were all like "no, we're not going to raise him, we get less loot that way. Now hand over your character sheet so we can divide up your stuff. No we can't take the cost out of your character's share, we want to divide up their stuff, now hand it over." I tossed it in their face and left. It was my first game, and it was damn near my last.
I mean, is resurrection common in that world? It's usually NOT......and it's usually very expensive so if you're in a group of individuals looking to get wealthy by adventuring that may not be too far out of line lol.
@@MrBottlecapBill Them offering to fund resurrection out of their share alone kinda implies it wasn't that difficult in this case, they were just dicks
Hey Kelly I saw a previous post about you losing your mom. Please know that you are not alone and that we love and cherish both you and Monty and everyone who helps brings this channel to life.
As someone that grow up in Florida, i was taught as a child about different species of snakes, how to react to an alligator attacking, how to spot a rip tide at the beach ext ext. If you live in a dangerous place its common to be taught about some of the dangerous things you'd encounter. knowing the exacted numbers of the zombies saving throws is one thing but just understanding that zombies arent known for being smart and probably do badly against int saves are very different.
Nursery rhymes as well would be a good way to communicate certain common creatures such as troll, shadows, vampires etc. Not to mention, some of them can always be wrong. 😅
“Some of them can always be wrong” is a hilarious idea! It would be so funny to see a party throw a solvent on a slime thinking that it would dissolve instantly only for it to do nothing. The hypothetical look of “oh shit, my mom was wrong?” on the characters’ faces would be priceless 😂
in a German p&p system Das Schwarze Auge ( The Dark eye) vampires work very different than "normal" ... each one was unique in its vulnerabilities depended on its own believes and cultural background... so the goblin vampire we encountered once was unaffected by holy water or religious symbols, that would have worked on a "civilised human raise the right way", but was highly vulnerable to wolves teeth and weapons made of them. The desert troll vampire was vulnerable to cold damage ( and stopped regenerating ), because IT believed so ... was hilarious to find out, what worked against which vampires ( was a minor plot line we had to kill 5 vampires of very different origins and natures )
@@christinefarrell6438 granted this was chatgpt (I suck at making my own haha) "The Troll's Curse" Deep in the woods where the shadows grow, Lurks a creature that few dare to know. A troll with skin like mottled stone, A hungry beast with eyes that glow. Strike it once, strike it twice, It heals its wounds like melting ice. Cut and claw, slash and bite, But still, it rises in the night. Yet heed this truth and hold it tight: A flame will stop the troll's dark might. With fire’s kiss, its skin will burn, And only then, it won’t return. So carry light and tend your flame, For trolls will play a deadly game.
First point: metagaming, I agree completely, but I'm not sure your examples are the best. I think the better example, is that the DM describes an event that happens away from your party, or imparts some knowlege that impacts just one of the characters that only that particular character knows and has not shared, yet the behaviour of another character is completely a response to the player having learned that knowledge when in fact their character has no clue. It takes some player experience to essentially ignore the information that their character doesn't actuallly know when roleplaying their character. I think the DM in such a position has to call out a player that does this. Not in a penalising way but just so they are made aware of it. I think this the most common and influential offense with metagaming, as oppposed to the door must have a lock scenario or that there's an NPC in a particular location, or a guess about cleric spells, which I feel are much less impactiful
For that type of metagaming I prevent myself from knowing because if I'm not with the group that something is happening to I simply get ready for it to be my turn. My DM knows I'm doing it and calls my attention to things that I would notice if I were nearby. It just happened Monday we were apparently in the same cavern but I wasn't aware of it, and he literally yelled Boom to scare me into paying attention. Now I'm getting on comes, were playing sw5e, and am asking him what the hell happened.
Sometimes after I give some info to my player, specific one, I tell him to phrase with his own words, so he decide how much he want to share. and the other players can stick with the right amount of information.
Yeah their door analogy sucked. It is a DOOR...there is always a way to open a door. Otherwise there would be no door. Also, requiring disintegrate to open a door like he said is legit HORRIBLE as a DM. That is a DM fail/lazy DM solution.
Unpopular opinion: Metagaming can be good. Metagaming is just another tool, knowing how to use it can improve the game experience. Having both a hammer and a saw is always better than having only one of the two. 🥸 Here is what people miss: Beginner player mindset: _"What do I do?"_ Average player mindset: _"What would my character do?"_ Advanced player mindset: *_"What can my character do to improve the game experience?"_* You see, the goal of the game isn't necessarily a perfect roleplay, for most groups the goal is having fun through collaborative storytelling. So there is a point in which, for the sake of fun, it make sense to deviate from a perfect roleplayed experience. Depending on the group and the situation, sometimes breaking the 4th wall for cracking a joke is better than staying in-character. Sometimes helping a comrades with meta-knowledge is better than an undeserved death. Sometimes an introverted PC can be talkative, if that means involving otherwise left-out players. Sure, in a perfect world, we should be able to both perfectly roleplay and have fun. But in the real world, that's not always possible, and that's where we need to make a compromise. The ability to calibrate in-game decision depending of in AND out-of-game context IS Metagame, IS exactly what the DM does all the time and IS what separates great players from average players. Metagame is indeed a unique feature of DnD!
One thing my group did instead of discussing character hitpoints, was describing to the table how our character is looking. It let us play up their injuries and made really dire battles very thematic to the group, and say someone wanted to heal a party member, they would have to base it on what they're "seeing" in the scene instead of raw numbers (we had a means of secretly chatting with our DM for questions etc. and they would keep track of our hitpoints along with us). I don't know, I really enjoyed playing that way. The DM of course did that with the enemies also, it was never "if I roll an 8 we can take it down" it was "this one is limping and bleeding out, lets target it."
This can cut both ways. As a DM, I do this to keep from giving away how far the enemy is from death. I have a player who wants to do this to create immersion but she also bears down on anyone who does mention numbers. There has to be some grace and forgiveness when the mask slips.
In games my dm never tells us the hp of the creatures which is good (tho we can usually tell when it's at about 1-5 hp), but in at least one of my games I play a paladin with a bunch of trauma, and one of his quirks is that he doesn't heal himself, saving all his healing for the other party members. So I never tell the party how low I'm getting, just "im doing alright," "I'm fine", "getting a bit rough." Etc. I'm one of the few party members not to get KOd yet somehow, despite rarely getting heals (I don't ask for them, it's fine) tho I did get down to like. 9 or 13 hp once at level 5/6 fairly recently which was fun and concerning
One of my most memorable moment was in pathfinder. Our characters were having an argument (fit within the character progression) and my friend broke role, asked if I was ok with him grabbing me up by my shirt and yelling in my face. It was appropriate for the role play and I agreed. I felt genuine fear, and it added such a deep level of gameplay. I truly felt connected with my character but he asked permission before crossing that boundary.
Kudos to all concerned. I've seen someone do that *without* OOC consent and the target (my now gf) was majorly freaked out by it. I was furious. (This was in a LARP too, for an extra layer of visceral unpleasantness.)
@@BlueTressym You'd think some people would consider asking for consent to do something like that to the actual person in real life. The fuck is wrong with some people.
@@guyfromdubai agreed. Larp can be even worse for toxicity than TTRPGs and the creeps and toxic people are harder to dislodge because it's a paid game. Almost no one is willing to kick out someone who paid to attend an event, so they generally get away with being awful.
Edit: If you are one of these players (or DMs!) that can emote to the point of tears or hysterics AND be able to responsibly turn it off, tell your tablemates beforehand. Be prepared to turn it down or ask your DM to help Direct you. Do NOT upstage anyone. This is not theatre. It remains a game.
Monty and Kelly, I really appreciate your channel. It's fun, informative, and has been really helpful getting friends into D&D. Keep it up, you guys are the best!
The only game I have had to leave was when a player decided to constantly attack me for my choices as a DM. No amount of speaking before and after the game seemed to help. If the player triggered a trap, he would yell at me saying his character wouldn't just stand around and let the trap be triggered. He never said his character was actively doing anything and just expected me to know what he wanted to do, even asking "what is your character doing as you are travelling? Is anyone on the look out or helping to navigate or are you all just relaxing while one taking turns driving? " didn't help because the answer would be "we are just travelling". Then they would get ambushed and I'd get yelled at because "well of course my character was looking out for enemies!!" After a certain point I told him I wasn't playing dnd to be a punching bag for him. He didn't seem to thing it was a problem and said it was my fault for not being able to handle it....
"Playing in my game is voluntary. Don't like how I DM? Leave." Boom. Problem solved. One of 3 things usually happens then. A, the player straightens up and flies right. B, the player quits. C, some or all of the players quit. Be perfectly happy about and prepared for all of these eventualities.
The worst experience I ever had in D&D was back in my 3.5 days. I was playing a bard and another player was a barbarian. After finishing the encounter we go to split up loot. (we roll a d20 and take turns picking items) The barbarian goes first, there was a +2 greataxe and a pearl of power. This player pulls out his copy of the DMG to look up the value of the items and chooses the pearl. Maybe I'm wrong here but I felt like he was way out of line.
The only productive way to react to this is (that I know): First, ask him to trade, IN GAME. Make your charachter ask the other charachter for the pearl, stating that the extra spell slot would be very import for all of you since you are a support/utility caster. Dont accept only a NO as answer, make them say WHY they dont want to give up the pearl. Motivation. This way it remains gameplay and charachter drama, not only player greed. Second, if he doesnt play it and refuses to roleplay it, call out the player asking why he is playing selfish in a cooperative game.
Fun fact: one of the guys who DMs for our group gave a sermon for our church that used D&D and rules lawyering as an analogy for not abusing scripture. He even used one of our fellow players as an example of someone who loves rules but isn’t a rule lawyer. It was a great sermon about not trying to bend the scriptures to find loopholes or trying to make it say what we want it to say. There’s about 15 of us in our church who play D&D together through various campaigns and one-shots, and thankfully I can say that I’ve rarely seen any of these issues come up at the tables I’ve played at.
@@stevenclark5173not really no. There are times where Jesus tells people to not take him literally most famously “I will tear this temple down and raise it up in 3 days”. So it’s actually Biblical canon that there are right ways to interpret that aren’t always literal.
@@off6848 my analogy for religion is we're all just a bunch of people sitting in a room pointing at a lightbulb in different ways, and getting mad at each other for which finger we use to point at it. I'm more concerned with what kinda paint is on the walls, and thankful for the light being there so I can see it, but to me it's just a lightbulb. I don't think it's God or Allah or The Trimurti, those are names we call it. We gave it. Who's to say who was right? Learn what you can wherever you can, be generous when you're able to and kind when you're not, and take it all with a grain of salt. Form your own opinions and know that nobody has the answers. We're all just learning as we live.
Arguing with the Dungeon Master hits me hard. I run multiple games for various people and it gets rough when the players are rules arguing. I ended up giving up on a group that just wasn't happy with my rulings or homebrew. I'm doing this for free and I rather do something else than argue with a player about rules or rulings.
Went through a lot of introspection and self-analysis in 2023 after a group of longtime (online) friends I'd been involved in a campaign with for years asked me to leave the game. In retrospect, some of the behaviors you advise us to avoid in this awesome video were things I was guilty of in removed but periodic incidents. Granted, I wasn't involved in a session zero, and I wasn't warned when I was making the table uncomfortable in each of these instances, but I had to accept that I was the problem. Not really any horror stories here to share, but personal testimonials or confessions, if you will. Things I found a lot of value in learning, albeit after the fact and at the expense of my friends' enjoyment. 1. Not Playing Collaboratively - I didn't realize I was doing this until after the session. A friend took Speak With Dead and was about to cast it on a long-dead relative of an important NPC. This was in 2022, before the D&D movie highlighted the comic mischief of letting this play out naturally. I was more than vehement and armchair gaming when I warned my friend at great length that a DM could screw you over if you didn't choose your words and questions carefully. In retrospect, it was bullying and trying to decide for a player what they wanted to do. I was worried about them screwing up and wasting the limited questions of the spell, but that honestly is part of the joy of playing D&D and finding out how magic works with the world. I feel bad about this to this day. 2. Stealing The Spotlight -- This was a primary accusation the group brought against me the day I was asked to leave. We had a lot of socially anxious and shy people at our campaign table, even those who were playing mechanically high-charisma characters. Nobody agreed on who would be the party face or the leader, and to be fair most groups don't even need a leader. You wonderfully reminded us that leaders need to listen to others. There were a number of sessions at the campaign where we'd be asked what we would do next, or what major decision/path to take ... and nobody would speak up. This would irritate me into thinking that nobody wanted to take any initiative or was dragging the session out. A lot of the social encounters involved me carefully choosing my words and conveying what the party agreed upon. I didn't see until after I left that I took center stage too often and didn't pass the ball or share the spotlight at all. My perception that I was having my personal questing rp or getting the party moving ended up being oppressive. I've been invited to other campaigns since I've tried to change who I am, and I'm happy to say I haven't been approached yet about being a problem at the tables since. But I'll never be able to forget how terrible it must have been for my friends in the one campaign to have an overzealous and hypersocial ruin the fun they were looking forward to every weekend. Also, uh, new DMs, never skip session zeroes. Especially when you onboard new players mid-campaign. Managing expectations and rp styles and what players want to get out of the game are essential.
You werent entirely in the wrong. That table might be dead without you. DnD parties need at least one extrovert or the game doesnt work. It cant move forward with a player deciding to DO something
Not a horror story - the opposite. This video really highlighted what an amazing group I have. It’s made up of my two grown sons (in their 20’s) and four of their friends and we play weekly 4 hour session. Two are a couple and out of state, so we play online. We’re just about at our 4th anniversary of our beginning, ready to finish our second full campaign in a couple of months, and they are the most engaged, honest, open, and awesome players I could have hoped for. They embody everything you say people should do *instead* in this video. I love this game, love my players, and, okay, love your channel lol. Cheers.
From my last gaming group, about 8 years ago, with people who I thought were close friends. It was clear that both the players and the DM didn't know the rules for 5e. They would constantly do and say things that weren't allowed and look confused when I role played using the rules as written. Like saying the fighter class doesn't get second wind til level 5, and letting town guards move 5 times their allowed movement speed in combat so the DM could get his party kill. I was always accused of not using the rules properly, metagaming and trying to cheat. One example: I was called out for not using two hands to spell cast with my druid, when my DM thought he had me trapped in another effort to try and kill me off. He said this is how all spell casting works, even though he allowed the paladin and bard to cast without any free hands (neither had the war caster feat). I said you only need one free hand to cast spells and was then kicked out of the group. It was such a toxic gaming experience that I haven't role played since.
At that point you have to wonder why are they even playing D&D if they refuse to learn basic rules. If they want something more rules lite there are a number of different systems they can use. Also what is up with the whole thing of the DM trying to kill his party off like that?
@theomegapotato370 the DM had lots of total party kills in his games, he was proud of it. I believe that if he found that someone had a character that was going to ruin his game, he would fudge or make up some rule that, so that he could kill the PC. My last character only survived such assassination attempts because I was too clever for him to get away with it. Every time I tried to explain why I was simply using the correct rules through my role playing, I realised everyone just saw me as a problem player. I'm a pro DM myself and I also own every 5e book, and so I found out every time he had also changed adventures to his advantage to kill us off, not give out magic items etc. The other players had no idea, most of them didn't even own the players handbook.
@@spbslinky7381 wow... just wow... i am sorry you had experienced probably the worst goup ever, that so profoundly killed your fun for ttrpgs. Please try to find another group, because there are enough out there, who search for good players. But that you faced the worst DM, one can imagine... the type that sees itself as the opponent of the party and not the storyteller, that just is a travelling companion through the groups story and mostly just gives the reaction of the world to the players actions is sad.
I had a player who would litterally vibe check me to see if I kept track of scientific facts in a fantasy setting like "how does the deathless curse affect bacteria?"(luckily I was always crazy enough to always have something ready like "they don't have a soul in my setting, so they're not affected") and once he stalled the game for one hour arguing just on misty step... And would just not shut up after asking politely for four times or so... Not to mention I usually had to remind him of the game session once the day before and once the day of the session or he would just forget (we never changed time and day, it was annoying...)
Yikes! Meanwhile, last session my pcs were chatting with a sea monster, and then one player goes "Wait... how is it breathing?" ...I genuinely have no idea how amphibious dinosaurs breathe. So I just told them I didn't know the answer, and we moved on. Hopefully you've found some better players now, or else i'm sending you my good vibes that you will soon.
I play with a bunch of geeks and nerds too (and I love them all). "Hey, how does airflow work in this dungeon? There's no ventilation system!" "Hey, how could a giant spider be a giant to begin with? It's weight would crush it." "How does a dragon breathe fire, or acid, or poisonous gas...Is it bio-chemical reaction or is the substance stored in venom sacks or something..."...My answer is always *dramatic wave of my hand* "It's MAAAAAAAGIC...."
I have an anecdote about metagaming which is made especially relevant by your example of "Everyone knows trolls are weak to fire damage." My current character, Penny, is a very unwise sorcerer who is desperately holding onto the belief that she's really a wizard (due to the combination of low wisdom, middling intelligence, and a desperation to impress her absent wizard father). I've been a DM before, so as a player, I have a pretty good knowledge of most of the monsters we go up against; as such, whenever we come up against a creature that I know relevant information about, I'll ask to make an intelligence roll to see if Penny knows it too. On a high roll, I remember the knowledge from one of my father's biographies, and on a low roll, I'm completely in the dark. My favourite example of this was on my very first session as the character. The party was level 4, and got told in advance that we were heading towards a bridge guarded by a troll and four goblins, so I said that Penny would go to the library and try to "learn" about trolls in advance. I rolled pretty low on my investigation check, so we decided that Penny had checked out a whole book called "combat against trolls 101", but had failed to learn anything from it because she had ADHD (as do I, the player) and kept reading the same sentence over and over. Everyone in the party BUT Penny knew that the troll was vulnerable to fire damage, but Penny was the only one with access to fire spells. The most fun thing about this was that all of Penny's spells have something to do with fire or temperature control, so I ended up using fire spells almost every turn... targeting the goblins. Then on the third turn, I had Penny shout, "you guys, I've noticed something. the troll keeps looking scared of me when I cast burning hands, and on the turn where he was hit by the fire, his wounds don't heal. I think this troll is vulnerable... to magic damage!" and I had her cast frostbite on the troll. By the next turn, the rest of the party had set me straight and the battle was over pretty quickly. But I couldn't have asked for a better introduction to my dumbass character.
A sorc holding onto the belief they are a wizard? If you have 10+ int they would be smart enough to know they aren't. Int is knowledge, wis is awareness. That whole interaction feels more low int not low wis. Your character noticed that they damaged the troll and shown fear...which is wis, not int. I know being 'dumb' is not a nice way to feel but I would def say the character comes across having more wis than int in how you describe the interactions than low wis and average int. Even ADHD itself comes off that way. You see/notice/look at everything and have issues focusing. "Ooh shiny!" is high wis low int. Being able to study and learning is high int. Lacking focus is low int (concentration is int based).
@@Nempo13 Psst, roleplay doesn't have to be limited by what stats your character has. As long as it makes sense to you and your table and everyone's having a good time, then nothing else matters. For example, in one of my campaigns I'm playing an elderly cleric. Someone new recently joined in table so I had my character chat with his over supper so we can learn a bit about his backstory. After the conversation I said that my cleric keeps chattering on with small talk for the next hour or so for until it's time for bed. The player wanted to roll deception so his character would appear engaged even though the small talk bored him. He got a 14. My cleric has a 16 passive insight so my character technically should have known the interest was forced. However I said my cleric was oblivious to this since it would be funnier to just keep on blissfully rambling on. No one objected and we all got a good laugh out of the new ranger trapped in small talk with the rambly old fart.
The most annoying thing I’ve seen is people removing other player’s agency by trying to control their character or cast spells that force them to do something on their turn. It makes players feel useless and gives off massive main character syndrome
Knowing your setting in detail can be a blessing and a curse to the table. You can help a lot with immersion and having big goals in the world that the DM can use to drive the action. But when the DM presents something that contradicts your knowledge of the setting, you need to have an understanding with them about how to sensitively respond: do they appreciate a quick side message about the canon lore, or are they building a story that purposefully deviates from the lore as you understand it? I had that conversation in Session Zero, and my DM invited corrections on the canon lore for the sake of the players who love the setting, but that's not a license to be a jerk about it. Also, there are plenty of times when I think, "That's not how I imagined this character would act, but it's my DM's take on this world, so let's roll with it!"
Yeah, especially when it's something that relates to your character. It's so touch and go with one of my DMs because dude has the memory of a goldfish for some things and a steel trap with others. So it's like "did he really forget my tiefling is part demon or are these devils at his former home making deals with his father on purpose?" Even just asking some DMs will get the metagame alarms blaring at some tables so I waited it out just to confirm he forgot and by then my arc had been riddled by inconsistencies...
I say this as a DM: The “Refusing to buy-in” thing is more often than not because of inexperienced DMs. A DM who does not do work to give the characters ample motivation for the characters to progress the story has done something wrong. That’s why you should always start by either a) letting your players know what kind of characters you want them to play, b) reading up on their backstories and giving them each a good reason to progress, or c) put them in a situation in which the only logical things to do progress the main quest.
actually that is where the famous "Session zero" comes into play, where the DM vagely explains what he wants in his campaign and the players give their input on what they want to play. THEN both the DM and each player should come up with a motivation together, that then can be written into the story. So the DM always has some clues about each character to steer them into a direction that will progress the plot.
Yes, but also everyone needs to be cool with PCs retiring if they have no reason to adventure. The price of player choice is that some choices lead to losing your character. That's just part of the game
@@trequorThe buy-in thing is one of the many reasons I stopped playing my first campaign. During the first session, we came up with that local children have been going missing and there’s a suspicious mansion on the hill. So as a local, my motivation was to go rescue the kids. After several sessions of exploring the mansion, we found a mysterious orb and we (against my wishes) went back to town to get into on it. We found a wizard who would tell us about it, IF we agreed to do him a favor, any favor, later on-or else. I was against this, but other players agreed, and eventually the wizard (ie the DM) decided that “we” had agreed to his conditions. The orb was a worthless thing and the wizard said he’ll give us our mission (that we “have to” do) after we rescue the kids. We went back to the mansion, I ended up dying, the party resurrected me, and I said I’m retiring the character and not playing anymore. I was interested in the haunted(?) mansion and rescuing the kids campaign, but once it moved away from that into the “real” campaign I completely lost interest. But like I said, this was one of many reasons I’ve stopped playing D&D.
One solution I find that helps me as a somewhat forgetful DM, and also seems to help put players at ease (works best on digital character sheets): add in clarifying text. If a decision markedly changes how someone thinks an ability works, making a note to clarify the change ensures that both player and DM remember what was decided. Examples: "When Fireball spreads around corners, its range is based on the length of the path the fire takes, not always a perfect circle from the point of origin." "If a magic item allows you to cast a spell as an action, you can use that magic item for an opportunity attack granted by War Caster." "The lump of brimstone conjured by this spell is a Small, irregularly shaped object with a soft and chalky consistency. It does not fill its square."
Yay, time to pull out my “tourist twins” story again! The single WORST experience I’ve had as a DM was with these two completely jackass twin brothers who *say* they want to play an epic adventure, yet every time I present an adventure hook, of ANY KIND, they insist on skipping town and would drag the rest of the party with them and force me to improvise a backwater village where they can then force me to role-play the local milkmaid that they proceed to have non-consensual verbal sex with. They’ve ignored goblin raids, orc attacks, zombie uprising, stories of dragons kidnapping a princess, tales of buried treasure, a fucking magical castle falling into the middle of the town square, and each time these two jackasses would be like “that’s our cue to get out of here!” I talked to them in private, in front of the others, calling out their bullshit during game, nothing works. Until finally I told them that their style is not meshing with my style and that they should maybe consider finding another group, and I shit you not these two fly into a hissy fit, one dumped his frappe onto my laptop while the other one threw a chair through my window, and they started to hurl verbal abuse at me about how I’m a failure as a DM and moreover a fail at being a human and I should go kill myself. I told them to leave my house before I call the cops on them, they do, but they kick my dog so hard as they’re leaving that they ruptured her spleen. They then proceeded to egg my house every other day while I filed restraining orders against them and when I finally took them to court for property damage and nearly killing my dog they kept shouting over me so much that the judge had to order them be restrained. Turns out those two have been having problems since they were kids but always felt justified since “we think the same so we must be right”. What’s worse than a psychopath? A pair of psychopathic twins who builds off of one-another it seems… To all you people thinking of replying“r/thathappened”, I see you, and while you might not believe me regardless of what I say, let me just put it here: everything I’ve written here really has happened, there are three people out there, the other members of this game group, who were equally traumatized by this experience as I was.
Players skipping town kinda happened to me (They teleported into spelljammer, which wasn't planned by me, tho I did allow it), but sheeesh your story went in a completely unforeseen direction. These two sound like cartoon villains for real.
@@besthobbit she’s an old girl but still a big big girl (Labradooodle) it’ll probably take a truck to kill her. Still, kicking a dog hard enough to rupture her organ is still animal abuse, and while those asses are serving time for aggravated assault, my head canon is they’re serving time for attempted murder (against my fuwa fuwa baby girl)
@@starhalv2427 twins do be like that, they compete and collaborate with each other in everything. At best they both become extremely successful to one-up one another; at worst they fall into depravity using each other as excuses to delve deeper. I’ve met a few twins but these two are by FAR the worst.
@@1003JustinLaw I only ever had contact with two pairs twins. First twins, sisters and neighbours to my grandma's vacation house, were cool, I couldn't tell them apart at all but they didn't mind and just laughed at it (It was a gag for me to always ask which one they are, even when I knew), we were good friends- eventually they moved out and we lost contact tho. Second twins were a bit more problematic, I met them on a sport camp my parents forced me to go on because I didn't like sport at all. These twins were kinda dicks to me, alongside other kids they made fun of me because I didn't do well at this sport at all, but when at the end of that camp I had a legit meltdown they were the ones, out of all the kids, to actually tell others "Hey, let's stop it, we crossed the line here", sit down listen to me about my issues and share their opinions, even shared a pretty sensitive topic about how they were often made fun of because they're twins in an attempt to make me feel better, so in the end they weren't as bad as I thought. So yeah, you're on point, whether it be at their best or worst, twins are pretty much always together and agree with eachother, whether they're competing or working together.
Im SOOO caught up on Monty's first example of metagaming. Because out of all the examples he gave one of the player just saying a incorrect statement 😂😂😂. I feel like metagaming is more like you as a player know the other player is a rogue so you don't trust them telling you he is a priest. Even though he's healing (through a feat) and is constantly praying. And you call them out for being a spy etc. Now THAT is metagaming
The rogue in our actual campaign introduce themself as a merchant. After the first few sessions he was scammed by another merchant and almost crit-oneshotted a mid-boss with 25-30 damage when the avg was 12. Now the running joke during combats is yelling “do your merchant things!”
I made a very similar argument regarding knowing how to kill vampires. I was playing an assassin who was friends with a family of lycanthropes. Lycanthropes hate vampires. When we walked into a town and started seeing signs of vampires, of course he knew what was up. He had spent the last 50 years listening to his friends bitch about vampires, and killing things was literally his job. I said to the DM "if I, at 35, know how to kill vampires, then my 150 year old assassin who lives in a world with real vampires definitely knows how to kill a vampire" I then proceeded to remove the steel arrow heads, so I was basically firing wooden stakes
I'm definitely in the "rehabilitate Rules Lawyer as a term" camp; I'm my tables' resident rules lawyer and every DM I have is grateful for it. I advocate for the rules, not the personal benefit. I am pretty good at inserting a quick "that's not the rule" while also only digging in if it's a substantial or important ruling. Just last session, the surprise rules were totally borked by the DM but I didn't even mention it until days later because the outcome didn't really change and it was a wicked complicated scenario. Even chatting 1 on 1 with the DM later took like a solid 20 minutes to walk through the whys and wherefores. NEVER would I tie up a session that long for something so minor. (it'd need to be an intentional unfair PC death to driev me to do that mid-session at which point I'd probably leave the game) I also have had a couple antagonistic DMs who have changed rules mid-fight to benefit their desired outcome and on a couple of occasions reverted the rule back after insisting we abide by their change. To those like Monty for whom the term Rules Lawyer can't be rehabbed... what would you call such a "benevolent rules lawyer"?
I get what you're saying here. When I'm not DM, I usually fit in this slot. When I DM though, and there's some rules dispute, I'll usually come up with a quick solution to the situation at hand ( just roll an ability check or something) ask if everyone concurs with the quick fix for now, and tell everyone we'll go over the specifics after the game or maybe even in the next session. It keeps the game flowing without stalling. Of course, when it really makes or breaks the game, we bust out our debating skills. In the end though, if everyone had their say I'll just pick the most logical ruling that came forth and declare that to be the rule from now on.
"there must be a way to open it." Me, the DM, expecting the door will be bypassed or ignored without being opened and literally having no clue what is immediately behind it:
I was getting really frustrated as a player with my first group (we were playing Shadowrun) - one player was a leopard turned human who obviously loved to hunt and didn’t mind brutally killing the bad guys and then feeding them to the zombies we had befriended. The other player was a young, innocent character „I can’t be part of this group if you keep murdering like this“ and we were all like…. This is Shadowrun. If you’re character can’t deal with situations like these it’s going to disrupt the game flow and if the murder hobo type player can’t stop unnecessarily provoking the sweet PC then that’s just adding unneeded conflict over the table bc that’s when things got personal… it really sucked and the campaign kinda just ended then without anyone bringing it up again.
That kinda sucks. Too bad you couldn't work it out. The game even has things like the Boston rule. Somewhere in one of the books it mentioned that Shadowrunning in Boston is a bit different in that there's sort of a gentlemen's agreement that if a party tries to limit casualties that the wronged business will not seek much in the way of revenge. If your team is reckless, murderous, and over the top they will hunt you down for ruining it for everyone. With that sometimes the party polices itself.
we once played 7th Sea and my character was an Usurian shapeshifter (something in the line of a rural raised naive Russian werebear ) and when in the middle of the campaign another player killed a beaten opponent in cold blood ( what was for that character a story arc completion and totally fine ). My take of my charakters morale was, that he would not condone such an action and consequently leave the group for his homelands... i created another character for the rest of teh campaign which the DM helped very much to fit in, giving me and our group fun times with my Eisen Greatsword Master ( a German knight with a very long blade if you will ) and i never looked back. My point is, if you have the right DM and group, there is always a way to stay true to one's character concept, even if that means to retire it.
These are all excellent, and I think Monty's point about how most cases of players feeling unsafe are about people acting creepily is really important. The only one I would gently push back on is contradicting the DM; if they're deviating from the published rules *in a way that makes your character non-viable* --something like "you have to be hidden to get Sneak Attack" or "you can't cast any spells while you're concentrating"--then I think it's appropriate to politely say something to the effect of "I understand this is your table, but if we play with things that way it's going to make it difficult for my character to work. Could we do this by the book just for this session, and then talk afterwards about whether I need to make a different character?"
Yep. I have a whole .txt of quirky character traits/ideas I'd like to use someday, but I always make it a rule to read/hear the campaign pitch and setting, and *only then* start thinking up my character. If I can't give a plausible reason why my PC is there and would be involved, I go back to the drawing board. Once this wound up with a beastfolk monk (we were all being a little munchkin in our builds and I wanted the massive DEX buff). However, this gal didn't know anything about beastfolk culture and didn't even speak Beastspeech, because she was raised in a Dwarven monastery. Her first language was Dwarven, she acted more or less like a very reserved dwarf, and it confused the hell out of *every* NPC we met. That was a hoot.
As someone who was very guilty of bossing players around, I have found that playing characters that are much more suited for follower positions (i.e. characters that are socially awkward or naive) and really dig into them, it helps so much.
I like this approach. Sometimes nerfing your projection into a character forces a player to use different colors to flesh that character out. It's a challenge, but it's rewarding.
Rules lawyer question: I feel like the most common situation I e come across this one is where a player has invested in a plan of action (either in combat or character development) based on a rule interpretation only to find out the DM has a different POV. Regardless of who I think is right, I feel pretty sympathetic to that person. Any tips for that specific situation?
For players: I'd give the guidance to always ask the DM and be honest about what your overall intentions are with a plan (it's not helpful to try to step by step walk the DM into a ruling where you're "tricking" them-- that's just unnecessarily adversarial). I think with experience playing you get a feeling for situations where the rules might be less clear, and you kind of know that you should just clarify it with the DM before you do that. For DMs: encourage your players to act as above, and don't be adversarial when they have cool plans, otherwise they won't be honest with you about their intentions. Try to interpret what they want to achieve, and even if their specific plan might not work with your rulings, maybe there's a way you can offer to them that they could achieve the same thing in a different way that does fit in your rulings. Also, if you're offering a "you can try" with a cool plan, be clear what the likelihood of success is, and what the consequences of failure will be. That way the player doesn't feel that you've ruled them into a disadvantageous situation. They get to make the choice with eyes open.
I've had this happen to me a few times as the DM, and I usually offer one of two potential compromises: 1. If the issue is significant, I'll just offer the player a replacement option (like a free respec or feat or boon that mostly provides what they want but in a less broken way) or 2. If the issue is more hypothetical, like if someone wants to play a summoner but I've had bad experiences with summoner PCs in the past that flood the battlefields with summons that gum up the game, or if someone wants to play a homebrew class, I'll straight up say that I'll allow it on a provisional basis subject to these concerns, but reserve the right to make changes if things get out of hand
Just had to ban two players from my table for several of these issues. We do milestone leveling on a fairly regular schedule, and everyone knows when it happens and to take time outside of sessions to level up their character. (I make time to meet up if anyone wants help.) These two were supposed veteran players but always showed up with none of the work done. They never knew what their characters could do or what items they had. One constantly did the lone wolf bit of "this is a stupid plan" and "I guess I'll pretend my character cares about this." The other would complain about not getting the spotlight, but his character never interacted with NPCs, even the ones he supposedly knew well. He wanted the plot to just cater to him automatically. He also complained constantly about taking damage despite being a fighter who ran headfirst into every combat. They both were constantly missing sessions (they were a couple) for things that supposedly couldn't be rescheduled, but they were messaging another player that they didn't care if they missed sessions and we should just cancel whenever. There was a lot of other stuff too, like constantly not paying attention. It was heavily affecting everyone else at the table, and any time we tried to ask if anything was wrong or they needed a break or had issues with the game, all we got was "everything is fine." My co-DM and I finally sent them a joint message very politely pointing out the issues we had seen and telling them we didn't think our table was the right fit for the kind of game they wanted. We were careful to clarify we still wanted to be friends and they were welcome at group dinners and movie nights. They both freaked out and accused us of a bunch of things, saying we were being aggressive and targeting them and had never wanted to be their friends anyway. It was paragraphs upon paragraphs of accusations and complaints. They also accused us of discriminating against them because they were both autistic, despite the fact that everyone at our table, including both DMs, is also autistic. When we offered to have a calm discussion, possibly in person, they said we were just looking to get more information to use against them. They then messaged the other people at the table behind our backs with a heavily modified version of events to make it look like we had been awful to them for no reason. Thankfully, we had already had several conversations with other people at the table about the issues other people saw and how it would be handled, so one believed them. If anything, the other players were really turned off by there behavior. Everyone has since cut them off, and now we're looking forward to running the rest of the game without all the drama, lol. But it was super affirming to see you guys list so many of their behaviors as actual problems, so thanks.
@@gustaafargoan That's amazing, lol. One of my kids had a phase when she was a bit younger where she kept saying autistic instead of artistic. Kids are hilarious.
The engagement one is so real. My group has all four of us with adhd. I set up a pile of fidget toys in the center of the table for us. I also recently a sketchbook because two of my players want to sketch things about their characters, and they were doing it in dry erase. This way they can keep it forever instead of wiping it lol
Had a friend in high school that pulled me in because I played with high experience players and DMs. He kept trying to force main character status on me in storytelling. I had to have a long talk with him about why I came in. I was the experience in a pack of newbies and had expected to be support for him and the players, not a main character. The game went better after and he's now one of the best DMs I know.
You guys are great! I've done a few of these things before, and i learned the hard way not to do then. I left my last campaign because they exhibited almost every problem you list here. I haven't played a game since 😔
Some metagaming is acceptable. For example if someone goes alone to check on things, monster attacks and they are outnumbered, I think it would be acceptable if someone in the rest of the party said "they are taking too long, let's check what's up".
Regarding the "Arguing with the DM" part - I feel like very often this happens when players brew up some insane combo that they either though about themself or found online, and they keept it as a secret to blast it out as a surprise in a clutch situation. And if in that moment the DM says "Sorry but this doesnt work" then that players feels robbed of his glorious moment and might get subborn. People should just tell their DM that they are planning this. "Hey DM, I was thinking about combining this magic item with this spell, and then when xyz happens then it blows up big time". This not only gives you confirmation from the DM, it also gives him an opportunity to set you up for this awesome moment. One great thing I did in my currently going Drakkenheim campaign was that I created a seperate groupchat with each of my friends that is Titled "DoD: Character Name" and anything regarding their character is discussed in their. It makes it easy for them to ask "Hey can me maybe make sure xyz is sorted out soon?" and i can keep track of it easily without Susans Waterpark trip pictures in the way.
That would make things easier, but it also makes it a little less cool if you have told someone your secret mastermind move and you don't have that surprise moment anymore. Also, if the rules used are clear enough and the group agreed to play RAW then I, think it's fair to expect the DM to allow it and not homebrew their own rules on the spot.
regarding the time traveling plasmoid personally plasmoid is one of my favourite races, but i also understand that as it is, it wouldn't fit into most campaigns. which is why often times i try to reflavour it. maybe it's just a regular slime given sentience, maybe it's a water elemental from the plane of water that wanted a change of scenery, maybe it is that spelljammer plasmoid, but it got stranded in that setting without any of its tech or anything. but in all of these cases the important thing to do is to work with the DM to say "hey. this is the kind of character i want to play, i know that at base it may not work with your campaign. what can i change to keep my vision for them, while still having them fit within your campaign?"
My golden rule of TTRPGs: It's everyone's job, including the DM, to make sure everyone is having as much fun as possible, including the DM. The main tool to accomplish this is mature discussions at the appropriate time and session zero, session zero, session zero. Setting the right expectations and stating your deal breakers are crucial for having a fun game. I've been playing TTRPGs for nearly 30 years now and I've seen and made most of the mistakes mentioned here. I've gotten better and I still have plenty of work in several areas, but I'm making progress. As someone with super ADD, I especially relate to that conversation. I don't know if I can do much about it other than knowing I simply can't do anything on the side because I'm going to get completely distracted. I'm not gonna read, watch RUclips, listen to music or anything like that when driving, so I'm not gonna do it when I play TTRPGs. Sometimes I get distracted anyways (at the table, not when I'm driving) and that's where my friends will just have to cut me some slack. It's tough having a discussion about problem behaviors with people who are hopefully your friends but neither you or they will get better unless it happens. You can't fix something you don't know about.
I often find myself in a bit of a grey area at a table where I'm a player. The DM and all the other players are less experienced and not as rules savvy. Sometimes the DM looks to me for certain rulings or players will ask me if their character can do certain actions or combos rather than ask the DM. I find myself helping out and saying how I'd do things, or guiding to how something might work RAW but also making sure to bite my tongue to not overstep my boundaries. I'm still a player after all and I don't want to take anything away from the DM, but I also won't turn down advice when it's asked. It's a weird line to walk sometimes. Great table, really enjoying it and the DM is a great story teller and mood setter, just occasionally strange and I gotta be careful navigating it. There's absolutely certain rules this table takes for granted that are flat out wrong but it doesn't matter, I say nothing because everyone is still having fun.
@@youtubewatcher9469 ah see now here's where you and I differ. Wouldn't you get pissed off if someone else decided to tell you what your role is? Do what's fun for you, and maybe between games offer friendly advice, suggest a spell or two. Maybe a paladin concentrating on bless is better standing back a bit and doing some damage, especially if the DM is lenient and lets them smite with a thrown weapon
We had several DMs as players and the most frequent question during conversations was "yeah, but does your character know that?" We would enjoy doing things the character would do that we knew would not work. "That was dumb." Yeah, but that's what an angry half-drunk dwarf would do. "Oh yeah, true." We had no problem role playing the characters and thought that was the most fun...not trying to "win" the game. To us, there was no way to lose D&D. It was all about pizza and board game breaks, and BS with friends. How can you lose?
Really wonderfully informative content, as always! Have you guys done a video already where you talk about safety tools for D&D? I'm really intrigued by that concept and would love to know more. I'm very new to the game, I'm neurodivergent, AND I'm shy, so having a variety of options to express myself is most welcome, and I'm very curious about what is available for safety tools.
35:00 I once had a campaign where we had a player that has severe arachnophobia. The DM refused to replace the spiders with stand in creatures with identical stats. She ended up leaving in tears after the DM kept describing the spiders attacking her. It was heart breaking.
I’ve been the “why would I go on this quest? Why would my character care?” Player before, but it was because my DM had serially ignored my characters motivations. I also DM and I was so willing to work with him to come up with a narrative tie in for my characters backstory or something, but he consistently snubbed me. What sucked is he just liked the other players more. He resented me irl and took it out on me in game.
I'm getting back into the game and have been appreciating and enjoying your advice across this and other videos! Regarding the time-travelling plasmoid example, I'm of the inclination that as DM, I'd probably ask the player and the table if they'd be willing to work with me to make their backstory and motivation fit into the campaign. For example, I might have suggested that their plasmoid comes from a far future shaped by Straad winning, and where plasmoids are used as advanced blood sacs for vampires. If they're a pirate, maybe they're stealling and freeing other plasmoids from vampire control. Here's the idea: You've come to the past by accident when escaping from your vampire tormentors, and you only vaguely know that this is an important point in history, but not much else. Now the adventure has this sense of importance to it, and the player has the fun flaw of being a most enticing treat for every vampire in the area. I forsee a fun tension being whether the player's character becomes the inspiration for vampires targeting plasmoids in the future? Again, I'd want the whole table to be down with this before moving forward, but that's the point, communication and negotiation are key to coming up with fun for the whole group!
So true about the things to keep your hands busy to help focus your mind - I was at a whole day corporate planning day where the facilitators supplied a huge stack of pipe cleaners in a wide variety of colours on each table, and explained a the start of the day that they were there for us to fiddle with so that we could concentrate. It worked very well, although I will never know what the design purpose was of the weird pipe cleaner constructs I made while not thinking about them.
As someone who's been writing their own game as an introduction to RPGs, thank you, gentlemen, for your countless contributions to our shared spaces ✌️
I’m playing in a Tyranny game and I decided to let my hexblade warlock walk away on a different mission because I wasn’t feeling like she was adding to the story. I’m now playing a monk that has more buy-in to the plot. I’ve also noticed it’s been easier on the DM to engage my character as well.
"Failure can be just as fun as your successes" That came up in the most recent session I was playing in (where incidentally we were playing Dungeons of Drakkenheim so... hi), where my Bard got hit by Feeblemind and failed his saving throw against it... I spent the rest of the session fully committing to the bit of playing a guy who basically was running purely on base instincts and could neither speak nor reason. We even flavored it once when we ran into some monsters in the city that they heard us because my Bard was basically just wailing like a baby over some random inconvenience. Granted, it was much easier to commit to this bit for me being that I've kinda always played my character as the resident Comic Relief, like, even when he's *sane* he's generally on the silly side.
Safety tools are a good suggestion. I'm going to run a campsign soon-ish and I'll happily add these to session 0. I left a campaign semi-recently because the DM never disclosed being absolutely unwilling to discuss *any* sort of concern or worry any player had. I had to find that out the hard way; basically the DM getting annoyed amd telling me to leave if I don't like what he's doing. This included some odd choices on his part. Making my character a murderer as a cliffhanger, only to start session next time with "lol jk your victim is a flesh golem", while refusing to address my concerns privately for an entire week. Apparently I "seemed suicidal". I wasn't. My character didn't do anything like that, either. He flat out refused to allow me to use an ability my character had, saying it doesn't work that way. Yes, it does. Everyone I spoke to, including strangers, everywhere I read, I even asked on the D&D discord...all said the ability works like I thought it does. DM refused to acknowledge. He also took away all players' rolls for no reason. It didn't speed things up. His excuse was "to preserve the mystery"...all we did was check doors for traps. "But if you roll an 18 then that will influence your decisions vs if you didn't know whether or not the door is trapped" ...dude, if you don't want us to know, there has to be better ways than taking all of our rolls away. I brought that up, too. It was confusing for all of us DM just got really annoyed, again, because apparently he's the kind of person who absolutely can't handle anything that isn't positive or praise. Heavily hinted I should leave and that he didn't care of everyone else left too. The other players did nothing wrong there. I may have brought up a thing or two I wasn't happy with, but I don't think I'm the problem player. He wasn't willing to have a conversation about it like adults. Instead he got upset, blamed me for everything, and refused to speak to me any further. It would be weeks until we'd have next session due to holidays. I left. I don't want to play with that jerk anymore. Led to cutting ties with that group entirely, as they stopped talking to me as well, and kept canceling the sessions I was running for them (minus that DM), while they still had their sessions with him. Guess the DM must've talked shit about me. Whatever, though. I'm better off now. Point is, just be willing to talk to one another. Dusclose these kind of things, even if you aren't proud of them. I mean, the guy has been a DM for years. I do not believe that I'm the first and only player to *ever* bring up a concern, in a polite fashion. This couldn't have been a surprise for him. He just never told us and we'd find out by trying to talk and get shut down with basically "shut up and roll with it, or else just fucking leave". Yes, the DM gets the final say. Sure. But does this include taking away rolls and abilities for no real reason, and then I'm not allowed to try and have a discussion about it? I don't think so. If he could give me a reasonable explanation for why he did these things, ok, fair enough. But he refused to talk about it at all. I do not think "shut up and deal with it, or else" is a healthy attitude for a DM to have. It depends on context, but players are not necessarily "wrong" for having a discussion about it after session, and the DM doesn't always get a free pass just for being the DM.
The problem with safety tools is that they are easily abused. Not only that, but some of the worst kinds of players are drawn to abuse them. It's just another problem for the table.
In regards to boundaries, my perspective differs a bit from Monty's observations about most issues being out-of-game, player interaction issues. Rather, I have experienced DMs and other players using real-world racist troupes and stereotypes (including offensive voice patterns) in-game, or using the fantasy setting to be able to exercise in-game their mean-spirit and hate towards people who are different than them. Sometimes it has been shocking, enough to make me feel unsafe. So my hope is that DMs also consider not just the degree of violence and adult content at their table, and what their players are comfortable with, but that everyone around the table considers the representation of various communities.
I'm so excited, I just got my Sebastian Crowe's guide! They have made it to Australia. Beautiful book and maps, great GM screen, minis and cards are excellent quality! Thank you dudes 🎉
To add to the "Being Unprepared" section, if I may, be prepared to actually participate. And this isn't just "being engaged". You can show up, be engaged at a minimal level, not being on your phone, but still not prepared to actually participate. I did this a few months ago. I was going through a bout of depression and showed up for a session that I shouldn't have showed up to. My DM, rightfully, called me out on it.
I played together with a dude for like 5 years that never grasped the core rules and always brought the game to a grinding halt when it was his turn, he was hyped for coming up with characters but as soon as he played them he was distracted with drawing and never knew what the group was doing nor what his character was capable off.. My whole group are on the spectrum but that player didnt really hide that he had no interest in the story we were all playing
The not respecting boundaries is the most important. I made an Aarakockra wizard, set on mastering the elements and was kind and and adventurous, but my DM brought us to a city ruled by Graz’zt and there was this huge party. I felt uncomfortable when other players described how they had sex, and when I went into a tavern for some meat for my pet and worms for myself, there were naked dancers, I felt uncomfortable and I regret not sharing that before I left that session. When you feel uncomfortable with another player or the DM, say something.
I haven't DMed for decades (2nd edition), but I had the displeasure of having a few metagamers and cheaters at my table. I was running a modified version of Castle Amber (mostly that the placed treasure was different or simply didn't exist), and these players insisting on "searching" rooms where "they knew" there was "supposed to be treasure there". Mind you, I knew that some of the players would be familiar with the module and they agreed beforehand to not metagame - they lied. I also had cheaters, in that they would quickly grab up low rolls, saying they were a "cock dice". They would also not keep track of HP or spells used. This behavior made it un-fun for the DM and the other players.
"doesn't mean you're Fighting the exact troll from the monster manual" Isn't the main thing with trolls that they are so rapidly mutating that you would not expect any two to be the same?
You mentioned "gracefully removing" someone as a last resort. Have you ever made a video on how to do that? The only one I can find on RUclips is from DM Lair, and I don't really want to trust that guy on a social issue.
It's so good to hear you guys talk about this so candidly. I could have been right there with you talking about this 😂 I too am a DM who likes games ran a certain way, so I DM more than I play.
RE: 35:50 Monty says most boundary-crossing errors he sees are related NOT to game-stuff, but other more RL-related topics. I just thought it worth adding to what they said around this subject; the "old saying" about "not discussing religion or politics among friends/fam".
12:56 I recently played a one shot as a ranger. But I had such short notice I turned up without a complete character sheet, I was expecting a little discussion at the start to make sure we were all ready, instead the DM jumped us straight into an encounter, which was especially embarrassing when I realised I didn’t know what my AC was (luckily I didn’t get hit in that one). So I spent the entire one shot modding the sheet and looking up spells to add when needed. To be fair I was given permission to do this, and I ultimately only used hunter's mark. Believe it or not other people struggled with their characters more than me in that session. 45:26 I this applies more for this time stamp, but it was the "changing spells mid-comment" that reminded me.
My personal issue: Just the basic lack of common courteousy. I didn't even start playing, I just asked if I could sit-in and watch and listen. "Do you have any experience?" "Not yet. I'm getting into it. I wanna see how you guys do it. I've been watching watched Dungeon Dudes, Dem 20, Critical Ro-" "THATS NOT REAL!" "Ohhh-kay" *as I'm walking away* "That's just a bunch of rich actors ruining everything because they have money and-" *I walked out the door* saying "this won't work out" I wanted to watch, learn, be quiet, and I was just answering YOUR QUESTION. And I'm getting interrupted by just answering a question? I'd rather NEVER play honestly
One of the current "mistakes" in our campaign is my wife jumping in and asking a whole bunch of questions when my character is alone with a few NPC's who know his secret. She felt real bad about it when she realized she was doing it, but got a simple "We all do it at some point" from my best friend and I. It ended up with us just putting her in the room with me, and having a laugh over the "You're all asleep!" scene from the first Gamers movie. Let's face it, it gets real hard at times to step back and try to keep out of the fun when something exciting is happening to someone else’s character.
Something equally toxic I did once as DM to a metagaming player was that one time during combat, every time he mentioned "this monster should only have 27 hit points" I gave it an extra 10 hit points, I think he called it out enough so it ended up having almost 100 hp by the time the level 3 party defeated it.
As a person who loves to play the face, I like to say things like "Guys, back me up" so I'm not the only one talking. Also, diverting NPCs attention so the stealthier characters can sneak where they need to go
A part of "Not Playing Collaboratively" is that D&D is a team game, so it can sometimes ride the line between discussing tactics during combat and trying to play the whole party.
Cue some DM making a game where your characters make character sheets, and roleplay being bad players roleplaying 2nd-step game characters badly by having these traits. It's a FUN placeholder when your campaign is not quite ready. Or make fun of a bad player that was kicked out...
I recently was a player in my friend's campaign (I'm the forever DM of my group), and I was playing a monk. We went through an entire combat, after which I realised that I had been playing my level 3 monk as if I had Extra Attack. No one had noticed, probably because I was playing a monk. Biggest rules blunder I have made as a player.
Ah yeah. While my group's main game is on hiatus one of the players started a oneshot and first night only I showed up so we did a sort of introductory play of my character splitting from the group to do a small one person job to just play and flesh out the town etc. I stumbled more into the mystery of what was going on than I expected to and had meta knowledge on a monster that attacked me and an npc I was following on suspicions. I I thought I knew what the monster was, based on a dnd story I listened to on yt a while ago. I told him as much afterwards and said I'd try not to metagame but this never really happened to me before. Sadly that fell apart from people being too busy but I was worried about accidentally letting my assumptions interfere with the game.
42:09 at my table, the context of the words "bonus action" have led me to allow another full action as a bonus action, including attacks, UNLESS their class has 2 attacks already. At that point, i reduce it to a normal bonus action.
I love to share the spotlight so to speak. As an example my character is very stubborn and reckless. So I momentarily took the spotlight, jumped in the room and casted thunderwave and punched a bunch of people. After that the enemies ganged up and beat me down to one hit point, tossing me out of the room. (I’m a level 3 monk/wizard) now what? “Guys help!” *tooth falls out*. And for the rest of the combat I’m working with everyone and staying in the back to cast the spells everyone else needs to have their moments. Because I chose to have a heroic turns comedic moment, which lends itself well to passing the torch. Just an example of how to do this. But on the flip side I have found that when it comes to strategy I tend to overtalk. But I try to ask people what they think or step back and reserve my ideas at times 30:58
Great video and advice dudes! Especially on working with the party and other people at the table to avoid these. Just one thing. The example with the goblin boss for metagaming is kinda hard to avoid though. if you know how much hit points the monster usually has, you can't just forget that information. Someone pointing out that the monster has more hit points than usual or that it "should have" isn't a great example. Was pointing it out necessary? Probably not. But it certainly isn't "catching them metagaming".
Me and most of my players are also DM’s. And a thing that we end up doing is asking if a creature is vulnerable to a damage type immediately after we hit it with said damage type. An example we had just yesterday we fought a mummy and one of the players hit it with Necrotic Damage, which it was immune to, and then it was hit with Fire. To which I asked “aren’t mummies vulnerable to fire?” To which he responded: “Maybe.”
One of the things I've really appreciated about playing as an Artificer and using several of my infusions (and crafting down-time) on other players- it's all but guaranteed I can't accidentally slip into trying to a main character.
40:10 I had someone teasing me about playing a female character in an all male party, saying I was doing it to have "relations" with npcs and pcs in the game and that was the reason. It was really rather hurtful to say that my motivation was because of that. Not everyone is motivated by lust.
RE: Metagaming - If nothing else, using fire for trolls or stakes though the heart for vampires would probably be solutions that adventurers could stumble upon simply because they're already pretty reliable ways to kill most things. RE: Cheating - What if the character was someone who has access to such knowledge (like a researcher wizard whose spellbook was also an in-universe equivalent to the Monster Manual)?
In my first Pathfinder game, I'm planning to play an arrogant/overconfident Psychic that believes they're destined to become the strongest spellcaster in the world due to their natural talent in magic. Can I get some ideas in the comments about how to avoid the third issue listed in this video while playing that kind of character?
Avoiding some amount of metagaming can be tough when the players know a lot about the setting and monsters. Sometimes it's best to just address this explicitly so players don't feel like their character has to waste a turn hurling a lightning bolt at that Shambling Mound just to be a good sport, bc their character wouldn't know better. I like introducing skill checks to formally confirm whether the characters know or can infer things about monsters. Nature to know or observe something about a beast; Arcana for constructs; maybe Religion for undead. If the roll succeeds DM confirms one piece of info their character knows, like one of their saves or their max hp. Can your character tell how many Mephits her Sleep spell will likely affect? Well, how healthy and hearty do they look - roll a Medicine check maybe. I also like that this can reward players for investing in skill proficiencies that don't come up as often as, say, Perception. And if the rolls slow combat down too much, you can just run them like passive checks.
I have a habit of rules lawyering, but I try to make even, correcting both DM and players, and always couch it under "technically, the rule is -this-, but it's up to the DM", cause sometimes people misread things, or forget things. I know as a DM, I greatly appreciate when my players try to help me out, so long as they're ok with me telling them "that is the base rules, but this is how we're gonna run it."
On refusing to buy in to the campaign/adventure - there ARE exceptions that are justifiable. I have been in games where the GM set up scenarios that were specifically against the motivations of my/our characters, which were already agreed to - or EVEN given to us by the GM (at conventions). Don't tell me I'm a selfish dark side star wars character, and then expect me not to assassinate my teammates to collect the full bounty for myself. Don't say 'you can make up a heroic noble hero' and then expect us to delve into a property legitimately owned by someone with only the temptation of stealing valuables. So, yes - players should follow this principle, just as the GM should follow the principle of understanding and building around the motivations of the PCs.
The thing that really winds me up is players (particularly spell casters) who then it gets to their turn and they go, oh ummm let me see what can i do here ummm and then saying, what spells do i have ummm. FFS know your spells if your a spell caster and plan before your turn what you want to do! 😠
For 'coaching' I think - other than if someone asks obviously- the only time it's appropriate to jump in, is if what they're going to do would undo what someone else has done. For example, the amount of times I've seen a cleric use turn undead, half the monsters start fleeing, half remain and then people who weren't paying attention when the cleric read turn undead start attacking the fleeing undead is staggering. This turns the clerics cool moment into a complete waste. I think a 'hey, that will undo the turn' I'd appropriate there and similar situations.
One time I felt very unprepared for a game of D&D. It was my first time playing a melee attacker, and I had previously always been spell caster characters. Once we got going, I realized that I didn't actually fully understand the physical side of combat. It was pretty embarrassing, because it kept slowing things down.
![OsamaSon - ik what you did last summer [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4DIQDnu3mr4/mqdefault.jpg)
Kelly, I was sad to see on Instagram that you lost your Mom. I've been down that road. Hang in there and try to remember the good days and not the last ones. Time will help.
You could’ve taken time brother, we who love you and can understand some things take serious time. I’m sorry for your loss brother. Thank you for everything.
I’m sorry for your loss, I lost my mother 12 years ago.
It’s OK to not be OK right now, and there is no time limit for the grieving process.
Your mother’s legacy will live on in you.
Agreed. Lost my mother without warning 2 years ago, and when it first happened I was broken. Luckily, with the help of friends, family, and a bit of hobbying, I was able to pull through in the end. Here’s hoping Kelly can make it through this trial of his, too.
I'm so sorry to hear of your loss. Hang in there.
Kelly, my condolences. I’m sure your mom loved you deeply.
Another bad behaviour: refusing to lose.
The player who tries something - usually takes a while to explain - but after a roll or two it fails and they say, “Actually then I won’t do that. My character would know it wouldn’t have worked. Instead, I will…”
Takes up so much time and also isn’t fun since they have no tolerance for loss.
wouldnt rolling a dice indicate an action took place? i feel like rolling dice means your swinging your sword or blasting a spell. you cant redo a missed swing so why allow the PC to reroll a different scenario? idk i dont play DnD im just a poser.
@shmoga it does, that's the issue.
@@shmoga Sure, but such players are experts at phrasing things in a way where they get as much as they can for free, so to speak.
“If I walk over there… and if I then did this, because of this… would I then?”
And, of course, that means they have basically implied doing a lot already and if it doesn’t work they dismiss the entire thing as just hypothetical and argue they didn’t really do it.
My rule: As soon you ask to make a roll, or succeed at a cost, you commit to its result.
@@HorizonOfHope i guess dont follow how you allow that to happen. are they discussing how to play the game, or are they just pretending to play the game? cant you just say "good thoughts, what are you going to do?"
Kelly mentioning how failure can be just as fun as success is very timely, as it reminds me of something that just happened in my game last night. The PCs stumbled across some fey creatures who demanded that the PCs do something to entertain and delight them; my plan was that if the PCs described something sufficiently entertaining (perhaps with appropriate skill checks) then the fey would bestow some blessings on them. So the players described how they put on a show illustrating the great battle they had just fought earlier... and proceeded to miserably fail all their skill checks at it. They decided on the spot that their attempt to put on an epic show ended up coming across as slapstick comedy. The fey loved it, had a good laugh, and gave the PCs their blessing.
Great Story!
honestly, failing is usually way more fun and memoriable ,
for example, without spoilers im running drakkenhiem, and me and my players are usually crying with laughter becuase of how bad its going, they just got to level five i think we are at like 10 deaths now, and we are all loving the campaign
this is my biggest gripe with baldurs gate 3 being a pseudo d&d simulator, it simply does not even try Failure = different story, and instead just denies the player their prize
I thought he meant failing in the story, not just on the dice roll. Your example seems more like, how to change a fail into a success?
DM keeps beating my character over the head with info that her father figure is the bad guy.
Character doesn't want to believe it.
Roll insight- nat 1 with a -1 modifier.
"Yeah, this guy is lying. He would never do that"
I made a druid with the idea that I would be the stealthy scout via wildshape for the party. When a new player joined our party as a rogue, it was a struggle sometimes. The rogue is supposed to be the stealthy scout, but in many cases the druid can do it better. You don't want to take away from another player's strengths and overshadow them. So I started proposing to cast pass without trace and then (moon druid) bonus action into a small innocuous form to ride on the rogue's shoulder. With their high dex and expertise and the +10 I give them, it pretty much guarantees they succeed. But sometimes there are places they can't get to, which they can tell me to look into in wildshape form. So we both get to be the scout, but when our powers combine, we're like the uber scout. It is still a work in progress. But to fit into the video... Let the rest of the party play to their strengths. Build them up, don't make them feel inadequate because your uberleet optimized badass is prepped to solo the whole damn thing. Nobody likes a Mary Sue.
i can relate to that with my currently played gnome artificer ( with the scholar/researcher background ) in a group with 2 wizards. one of them just plainly doesn't care about backgrounds or active participation in table role playing, but the other IS my problem. He thinks, he is the only legit source of academic information and i have no input into knowledge skill tests, even when our group has a library to its disposal and that it IS my specialty to rumage through tomes and scrolls to find the hint, we are looking for.
The same player had an elven druid in our last campaign, but never used any druidic special features, when he got the "Oathbow" very rare magic weapon at character creation ( i very much blame the DM for this and the rest of our group sided with me, because ) and then just plainly played a worse ranger ( of cause taking Elven Accuracy, Sharpshooter cheese feats, but constantly cussing about only having one attack each turn...
Teamwork is the soul of the game
I have a duo that's similar (rogue and spore druid) and aside from what you describe, the druid wanted to help pick a lock by becoming a roach and creeping into the lock to guide the rogue's tools. It was a very cool moment.
One of the most frustrating things I’ve ever encountered (as a DM), is I was transitioning a group from a home brew one shot, over to Ravenloft. I ended the session with a description of an area they ended up with, and a player who’d already played Ravenloft spoke up “that’s not at all how the adventure starts”……
OH MY GOD I hate that shit
"Modrons don't act that way"
"Doesn't make sense that Iarno is from Phandalin"
"Um, goblins don't normally get that bonus action do they?"
In my game, THEY DO.
@@Odande Yeah, I had to say “you’re not there yet. You’re in a transition area on another world”. Like WTF
what a &÷;$>!*×&
@thetowndrunk988 that is just poor show from the player, I am running it for the 3rd time now and I have changed it nearly everytime on how they get there ^^
Edit: I meant for 3 different groups but for the same group I would 100% change it up
@@thetowndrunk988better to cut it right off by saying you'll play it your own way and won't follow the book exactly. And also mention if he starts metagaming the adventure you won't appreciate it.
Loved that "in a world where vampires don't exist" analogy
While in concept it makes sense, if you think about it for more than 1 second, it stops.
We know about weaknesses of vampires due to how easily accessible media is in our day and age. Internet, movies, TV, books (for those that still read them) and word of mouth in a time when going outside of city boundaries doesn't carry the danger of being attacked by monsters.
In the world of D&D, which is typically medieval, the only media accessible to an average person is word of mouth, with books being reserved for higher echelons of society and plays being a paid commodity, in addition to word of mouth being very easily removed by the fact that every time you leave your town/village, you might not survive. So no, a lot of people *wouldn't* know how to stop Regeneration of certain monsters because the way information travels is NOT quick or reliable in D&D settings
@@jpjfrey5673 bzzzzz wrong
@@MsKeylas just like your opinion, with zero arguments behind it.
Next
@@jpjfrey5673 thats not accurate. i would argue that we knew about vampire weakness long before modern media. There are literally real life examples of villages staking corpse cause they thought people were coming back as vampires because of how decomposition works. (I.e. bloating and red fluids leaking from nose and mouth)
@@jpjfrey5673Yea but vampires and werewolves are not **common** encounters yet folklore of their weaknesses is widespread. So it also makes sense that even though a troll isn't a **common** encounter, peasants would still know how to fight one.
The one thing I did in my first and ongoing campaign is I said "When you guys encounter a monster if it's common knowledge I will tell you "you see a Troll" or "You see a Yeti" and that's the cue that your characters will know what that is. If I describe but don't name the creature that's the cue that you might not know what it is and I might allow an appropriate skill check to allow you to see if you have knowledge of the creature. I did this when my players encountered a Wyvern but given the setting one player said "It sounds like a pterodactyl" out of character.
That is actually a really good idea.
This is one of the things that makes exotic monsters scary.
Pretending to not know that a vampire needs to return to his coffin or that a black dragon breathes acid is more trouble than it's worth. And then it just produces a different exercise in meta gaming where players are trying to come up with a reason for their characters to know the out of game knowledge. Imo it adds nothing to the game and is more trouble than it's worth. The description method can work however, along with mixing in variant monsters.
@@TA-by9wvit's REALLY not that hard, dude. 😂
Like you work off of what your character can know. Easy example with another property, if a pokemon trainer sees a Charmander it's easy to guess based on their fiery tail that they're a fire type. It's a whole other thing to be like "if the flame on its tail goes out it dies! At this level the possible moves it can know are X, Y, and Z!! It has this many points in DEF!!! etc.
I've taken the same approach with some one-shot adventures. I threw a bodak at a level 7 party but just described it instead of saying what it was. They only began to suspect it was a bodak after the half-orc totem warrior went down in round 1!
Not playing collaboratively... Reminding me of an awful group way back in 3.5 edition... they treated my character as a utility, and when he died, they were all like "no, we're not going to raise him, we get less loot that way. Now hand over your character sheet so we can divide up your stuff. No we can't take the cost out of your character's share, we want to divide up their stuff, now hand it over."
I tossed it in their face and left. It was my first game, and it was damn near my last.
What the hell lmao
I mean, is resurrection common in that world? It's usually NOT......and it's usually very expensive so if you're in a group of individuals looking to get wealthy by adventuring that may not be too far out of line lol.
D&D with the wrong people is worse than no D&D. I’m glad it wasn’t your last game - it could only go up from there!
@@MrBottlecapBill
Them offering to fund resurrection out of their share alone kinda implies it wasn't that difficult in this case, they were just dicks
@@MrBottlecapBillI would consider players putting money ahead of another player's life to be neutral evil at best.
1 hour long video of dungeon dudes,we eating good today!
Hey Kelly I saw a previous post about you losing your mom. Please know that you are not alone and that we love and cherish both you and Monty and everyone who helps brings this channel to life.
I read this comment during the section about spotlight hogs
As someone that grow up in Florida, i was taught as a child about different species of snakes, how to react to an alligator attacking, how to spot a rip tide at the beach ext ext. If you live in a dangerous place its common to be taught about some of the dangerous things you'd encounter. knowing the exacted numbers of the zombies saving throws is one thing but just understanding that zombies arent known for being smart and probably do badly against int saves are very different.
This ^
Nursery rhymes as well would be a good way to communicate certain common creatures such as troll, shadows, vampires etc. Not to mention, some of them can always be wrong. 😅
“Some of them can always be wrong” is a hilarious idea! It would be so funny to see a party throw a solvent on a slime thinking that it would dissolve instantly only for it to do nothing. The hypothetical look of “oh shit, my mom was wrong?” on the characters’ faces would be priceless 😂
in a German p&p system Das Schwarze Auge ( The Dark eye) vampires work very different than "normal" ... each one was unique in its vulnerabilities depended on its own believes and cultural background... so the goblin vampire we encountered once was unaffected by holy water or religious symbols, that would have worked on a "civilised human raise the right way", but was highly vulnerable to wolves teeth and weapons made of them. The desert troll vampire was vulnerable to cold damage ( and stopped regenerating ), because IT believed so ... was hilarious to find out, what worked against which vampires ( was a minor plot line we had to kill 5 vampires of very different origins and natures )
Oh that's a really good idea!
@@christinefarrell6438 granted this was chatgpt (I suck at making my own haha)
"The Troll's Curse"
Deep in the woods where the shadows grow,
Lurks a creature that few dare to know.
A troll with skin like mottled stone,
A hungry beast with eyes that glow.
Strike it once, strike it twice,
It heals its wounds like melting ice.
Cut and claw, slash and bite,
But still, it rises in the night.
Yet heed this truth and hold it tight:
A flame will stop the troll's dark might.
With fire’s kiss, its skin will burn,
And only then, it won’t return.
So carry light and tend your flame,
For trolls will play a deadly game.
First point: metagaming, I agree completely, but I'm not sure your examples are the best. I think the better example, is that the DM describes an event that happens away from your party, or imparts some knowlege that impacts just one of the characters that only that particular character knows and has not shared, yet the behaviour of another character is completely a response to the player having learned that knowledge when in fact their character has no clue. It takes some player experience to essentially ignore the information that their character doesn't actuallly know when roleplaying their character. I think the DM in such a position has to call out a player that does this. Not in a penalising way but just so they are made aware of it. I think this the most common and influential offense with metagaming, as oppposed to the door must have a lock scenario or that there's an NPC in a particular location, or a guess about cleric spells, which I feel are much less impactiful
Why "Notes" is a good thing.
Ofc if you play is also a show like the D-Dudes do, it wont work for the audiance.
For that type of metagaming I prevent myself from knowing because if I'm not with the group that something is happening to I simply get ready for it to be my turn. My DM knows I'm doing it and calls my attention to things that I would notice if I were nearby. It just happened Monday we were apparently in the same cavern but I wasn't aware of it, and he literally yelled Boom to scare me into paying attention. Now I'm getting on comes, were playing sw5e, and am asking him what the hell happened.
Sometimes after I give some info to my player, specific one, I tell him to phrase with his own words, so he decide how much he want to share. and the other players can stick with the right amount of information.
Yeah their door analogy sucked. It is a DOOR...there is always a way to open a door. Otherwise there would be no door. Also, requiring disintegrate to open a door like he said is legit HORRIBLE as a DM. That is a DM fail/lazy DM solution.
Unpopular opinion: Metagaming can be good. Metagaming is just another tool, knowing how to use it can improve the game experience. Having both a hammer and a saw is always better than having only one of the two. 🥸
Here is what people miss:
Beginner player mindset: _"What do I do?"_
Average player mindset: _"What would my character do?"_
Advanced player mindset: *_"What can my character do to improve the game experience?"_*
You see, the goal of the game isn't necessarily a perfect roleplay, for most groups the goal is having fun through collaborative storytelling. So there is a point in which, for the sake of fun, it make sense to deviate from a perfect roleplayed experience.
Depending on the group and the situation, sometimes breaking the 4th wall for cracking a joke is better than staying in-character. Sometimes helping a comrades with meta-knowledge is better than an undeserved death. Sometimes an introverted PC can be talkative, if that means involving otherwise left-out players.
Sure, in a perfect world, we should be able to both perfectly roleplay and have fun. But in the real world, that's not always possible, and that's where we need to make a compromise.
The ability to calibrate in-game decision depending of in AND out-of-game context IS Metagame, IS exactly what the DM does all the time and IS what separates great players from average players.
Metagame is indeed a unique feature of DnD!
One thing my group did instead of discussing character hitpoints, was describing to the table how our character is looking. It let us play up their injuries and made really dire battles very thematic to the group, and say someone wanted to heal a party member, they would have to base it on what they're "seeing" in the scene instead of raw numbers (we had a means of secretly chatting with our DM for questions etc. and they would keep track of our hitpoints along with us). I don't know, I really enjoyed playing that way. The DM of course did that with the enemies also, it was never "if I roll an 8 we can take it down" it was "this one is limping and bleeding out, lets target it."
My group also does something similar. It feels a lot better than just being given a number.
Great idea!
This can cut both ways. As a DM, I do this to keep from giving away how far the enemy is from death. I have a player who wants to do this to create immersion but she also bears down on anyone who does mention numbers. There has to be some grace and forgiveness when the mask slips.
In games my dm never tells us the hp of the creatures which is good (tho we can usually tell when it's at about 1-5 hp), but in at least one of my games I play a paladin with a bunch of trauma, and one of his quirks is that he doesn't heal himself, saving all his healing for the other party members.
So I never tell the party how low I'm getting, just "im doing alright," "I'm fine", "getting a bit rough." Etc. I'm one of the few party members not to get KOd yet somehow, despite rarely getting heals (I don't ask for them, it's fine) tho I did get down to like. 9 or 13 hp once at level 5/6 fairly recently which was fun and concerning
One of my most memorable moment was in pathfinder. Our characters were having an argument (fit within the character progression) and my friend broke role, asked if I was ok with him grabbing me up by my shirt and yelling in my face. It was appropriate for the role play and I agreed. I felt genuine fear, and it added such a deep level of gameplay. I truly felt connected with my character but he asked permission before crossing that boundary.
Kudos to all concerned. I've seen someone do that *without* OOC consent and the target (my now gf) was majorly freaked out by it. I was furious. (This was in a LARP too, for an extra layer of visceral unpleasantness.)
Yeah, there are such things as Method roleplayers, and these folks need to be upfront with the intensity that they are able and willing to portray.
@@BlueTressym You'd think some people would consider asking for consent to do something like that to the actual person in real life. The fuck is wrong with some people.
@@guyfromdubai agreed. Larp can be even worse for toxicity than TTRPGs and the creeps and toxic people are harder to dislodge because it's a paid game. Almost no one is willing to kick out someone who paid to attend an event, so they generally get away with being awful.
Edit: If you are one of these players (or DMs!) that can emote to the point of tears or hysterics AND be able to responsibly turn it off, tell your tablemates beforehand. Be prepared to turn it down or ask your DM to help Direct you. Do NOT upstage anyone.
This is not theatre. It remains a game.
Monty and Kelly, I really appreciate your channel. It's fun, informative, and has been really helpful getting friends into D&D. Keep it up, you guys are the best!
The only game I have had to leave was when a player decided to constantly attack me for my choices as a DM. No amount of speaking before and after the game seemed to help. If the player triggered a trap, he would yell at me saying his character wouldn't just stand around and let the trap be triggered. He never said his character was actively doing anything and just expected me to know what he wanted to do, even asking "what is your character doing as you are travelling? Is anyone on the look out or helping to navigate or are you all just relaxing while one taking turns driving? " didn't help because the answer would be "we are just travelling". Then they would get ambushed and I'd get yelled at because "well of course my character was looking out for enemies!!"
After a certain point I told him I wasn't playing dnd to be a punching bag for him. He didn't seem to thing it was a problem and said it was my fault for not being able to handle it....
"Playing in my game is voluntary. Don't like how I DM? Leave." Boom. Problem solved. One of 3 things usually happens then. A, the player straightens up and flies right. B, the player quits. C, some or all of the players quit. Be perfectly happy about and prepared for all of these eventualities.
Talk about an abusive personality in that player! Jeez
Throw. Them. Out.
That's not a personality type you want in your life generally, nevermind an RPG.
The worst experience I ever had in D&D was back in my 3.5 days. I was playing a bard and another player was a barbarian. After finishing the encounter we go to split up loot. (we roll a d20 and take turns picking items) The barbarian goes first, there was a +2 greataxe and a pearl of power. This player pulls out his copy of the DMG to look up the value of the items and chooses the pearl. Maybe I'm wrong here but I felt like he was way out of line.
Yeah, that's metagaming to get the most profit.
The operative phrase here is "need before greed."
The only productive way to react to this is (that I know):
First, ask him to trade, IN GAME. Make your charachter ask the other charachter for the pearl, stating that the extra spell slot would be very import for all of you since you are a support/utility caster. Dont accept only a NO as answer, make them say WHY they dont want to give up the pearl. Motivation. This way it remains gameplay and charachter drama, not only player greed.
Second, if he doesnt play it and refuses to roleplay it, call out the player asking why he is playing selfish in a cooperative game.
Fun fact: one of the guys who DMs for our group gave a sermon for our church that used D&D and rules lawyering as an analogy for not abusing scripture. He even used one of our fellow players as an example of someone who loves rules but isn’t a rule lawyer. It was a great sermon about not trying to bend the scriptures to find loopholes or trying to make it say what we want it to say. There’s about 15 of us in our church who play D&D together through various campaigns and one-shots, and thankfully I can say that I’ve rarely seen any of these issues come up at the tables I’ve played at.
Doesn't he know that playing D&D is a doorway to SATAN??? 👹👹👹👹
This is an encouraging anecdote and I'm glad to hear that you get to have that experience. 😄
The problem is that unless your a biblical literalist then everyone is bending the scriptures to interpret what they want it to say.
@@stevenclark5173not really no. There are times where Jesus tells people to not take him literally most famously “I will tear this temple down and raise it up in 3 days”.
So it’s actually Biblical canon that there are right ways to interpret that aren’t always literal.
@@off6848 my analogy for religion is we're all just a bunch of people sitting in a room pointing at a lightbulb in different ways, and getting mad at each other for which finger we use to point at it. I'm more concerned with what kinda paint is on the walls, and thankful for the light being there so I can see it, but to me it's just a lightbulb. I don't think it's God or Allah or The Trimurti, those are names we call it. We gave it. Who's to say who was right?
Learn what you can wherever you can, be generous when you're able to and kind when you're not, and take it all with a grain of salt. Form your own opinions and know that nobody has the answers. We're all just learning as we live.
Arguing with the Dungeon Master hits me hard. I run multiple games for various people and it gets rough when the players are rules arguing. I ended up giving up on a group that just wasn't happy with my rulings or homebrew. I'm doing this for free and I rather do something else than argue with a player about rules or rulings.
Went through a lot of introspection and self-analysis in 2023 after a group of longtime (online) friends I'd been involved in a campaign with for years asked me to leave the game. In retrospect, some of the behaviors you advise us to avoid in this awesome video were things I was guilty of in removed but periodic incidents. Granted, I wasn't involved in a session zero, and I wasn't warned when I was making the table uncomfortable in each of these instances, but I had to accept that I was the problem.
Not really any horror stories here to share, but personal testimonials or confessions, if you will. Things I found a lot of value in learning, albeit after the fact and at the expense of my friends' enjoyment.
1. Not Playing Collaboratively - I didn't realize I was doing this until after the session. A friend took Speak With Dead and was about to cast it on a long-dead relative of an important NPC. This was in 2022, before the D&D movie highlighted the comic mischief of letting this play out naturally. I was more than vehement and armchair gaming when I warned my friend at great length that a DM could screw you over if you didn't choose your words and questions carefully.
In retrospect, it was bullying and trying to decide for a player what they wanted to do. I was worried about them screwing up and wasting the limited questions of the spell, but that honestly is part of the joy of playing D&D and finding out how magic works with the world. I feel bad about this to this day.
2. Stealing The Spotlight -- This was a primary accusation the group brought against me the day I was asked to leave. We had a lot of socially anxious and shy people at our campaign table, even those who were playing mechanically high-charisma characters. Nobody agreed on who would be the party face or the leader, and to be fair most groups don't even need a leader. You wonderfully reminded us that leaders need to listen to others.
There were a number of sessions at the campaign where we'd be asked what we would do next, or what major decision/path to take ... and nobody would speak up. This would irritate me into thinking that nobody wanted to take any initiative or was dragging the session out. A lot of the social encounters involved me carefully choosing my words and conveying what the party agreed upon. I didn't see until after I left that I took center stage too often and didn't pass the ball or share the spotlight at all. My perception that I was having my personal questing rp or getting the party moving ended up being oppressive.
I've been invited to other campaigns since I've tried to change who I am, and I'm happy to say I haven't been approached yet about being a problem at the tables since. But I'll never be able to forget how terrible it must have been for my friends in the one campaign to have an overzealous and hypersocial ruin the fun they were looking forward to every weekend.
Also, uh, new DMs, never skip session zeroes. Especially when you onboard new players mid-campaign. Managing expectations and rp styles and what players want to get out of the game are essential.
You werent entirely in the wrong. That table might be dead without you. DnD parties need at least one extrovert or the game doesnt work. It cant move forward with a player deciding to DO something
Not a horror story - the opposite. This video really highlighted what an amazing group I have. It’s made up of my two grown sons (in their 20’s) and four of their friends and we play weekly 4 hour session. Two are a couple and out of state, so we play online. We’re just about at our 4th anniversary of our beginning, ready to finish our second full campaign in a couple of months, and they are the most engaged, honest, open, and awesome players I could have hoped for. They embody everything you say people should do *instead* in this video. I love this game, love my players, and, okay, love your channel lol. Cheers.
From my last gaming group, about 8 years ago, with people who I thought were close friends. It was clear that both the players and the DM didn't know the rules for 5e.
They would constantly do and say things that weren't allowed and look confused when I role played using the rules as written. Like saying the fighter class doesn't get second wind til level 5, and letting town guards move 5 times their allowed movement speed in combat so the DM could get his party kill.
I was always accused of not using the rules properly, metagaming and trying to cheat.
One example: I was called out for not using two hands to spell cast with my druid, when my DM thought he had me trapped in another effort to try and kill me off. He said this is how all spell casting works, even though he allowed the paladin and bard to cast without any free hands (neither had the war caster feat). I said you only need one free hand to cast spells and was then kicked out of the group.
It was such a toxic gaming experience that I haven't role played since.
At that point you have to wonder why are they even playing D&D if they refuse to learn basic rules. If they want something more rules lite there are a number of different systems they can use. Also what is up with the whole thing of the DM trying to kill his party off like that?
@theomegapotato370 the DM had lots of total party kills in his games, he was proud of it. I believe that if he found that someone had a character that was going to ruin his game, he would fudge or make up some rule that, so that he could kill the PC.
My last character only survived such assassination attempts because I was too clever for him to get away with it. Every time I tried to explain why I was simply using the correct rules through my role playing, I realised everyone just saw me as a problem player.
I'm a pro DM myself and I also own every 5e book, and so I found out every time he had also changed adventures to his advantage to kill us off, not give out magic items etc. The other players had no idea, most of them didn't even own the players handbook.
@@spbslinky7381 wow... just wow... i am sorry you had experienced probably the worst goup ever, that so profoundly killed your fun for ttrpgs. Please try to find another group, because there are enough out there, who search for good players.
But that you faced the worst DM, one can imagine... the type that sees itself as the opponent of the party and not the storyteller, that just is a travelling companion through the groups story and mostly just gives the reaction of the world to the players actions is sad.
@@spbslinky7381 That's one of the textbook warning signs of a toxic DM.
That is just a toxic DM, avoid and move on.
I had a player who would litterally vibe check me to see if I kept track of scientific facts in a fantasy setting like "how does the deathless curse affect bacteria?"(luckily I was always crazy enough to always have something ready like "they don't have a soul in my setting, so they're not affected") and once he stalled the game for one hour arguing just on misty step... And would just not shut up after asking politely for four times or so... Not to mention I usually had to remind him of the game session once the day before and once the day of the session or he would just forget (we never changed time and day, it was annoying...)
Yikes! Meanwhile, last session my pcs were chatting with a sea monster, and then one player goes "Wait... how is it breathing?" ...I genuinely have no idea how amphibious dinosaurs breathe. So I just told them I didn't know the answer, and we moved on. Hopefully you've found some better players now, or else i'm sending you my good vibes that you will soon.
My answer would have been "how does your character know about bacteria?"
I play with a bunch of geeks and nerds too (and I love them all). "Hey, how does airflow work in this dungeon? There's no ventilation system!" "Hey, how could a giant spider be a giant to begin with? It's weight would crush it." "How does a dragon breathe fire, or acid, or poisonous gas...Is it bio-chemical reaction or is the substance stored in venom sacks or something..."...My answer is always *dramatic wave of my hand* "It's MAAAAAAAGIC...."
With the one hour arguing... That would've been his last session at my table.
You're ruining the game not just for me but for every other player.
I have an anecdote about metagaming which is made especially relevant by your example of "Everyone knows trolls are weak to fire damage."
My current character, Penny, is a very unwise sorcerer who is desperately holding onto the belief that she's really a wizard (due to the combination of low wisdom, middling intelligence, and a desperation to impress her absent wizard father). I've been a DM before, so as a player, I have a pretty good knowledge of most of the monsters we go up against; as such, whenever we come up against a creature that I know relevant information about, I'll ask to make an intelligence roll to see if Penny knows it too. On a high roll, I remember the knowledge from one of my father's biographies, and on a low roll, I'm completely in the dark.
My favourite example of this was on my very first session as the character. The party was level 4, and got told in advance that we were heading towards a bridge guarded by a troll and four goblins, so I said that Penny would go to the library and try to "learn" about trolls in advance. I rolled pretty low on my investigation check, so we decided that Penny had checked out a whole book called "combat against trolls 101", but had failed to learn anything from it because she had ADHD (as do I, the player) and kept reading the same sentence over and over. Everyone in the party BUT Penny knew that the troll was vulnerable to fire damage, but Penny was the only one with access to fire spells.
The most fun thing about this was that all of Penny's spells have something to do with fire or temperature control, so I ended up using fire spells almost every turn... targeting the goblins. Then on the third turn, I had Penny shout, "you guys, I've noticed something. the troll keeps looking scared of me when I cast burning hands, and on the turn where he was hit by the fire, his wounds don't heal. I think this troll is vulnerable... to magic damage!" and I had her cast frostbite on the troll.
By the next turn, the rest of the party had set me straight and the battle was over pretty quickly. But I couldn't have asked for a better introduction to my dumbass character.
That's fun, but I'd expect one of the others to yell at her... "Hey, the troll. Hit him... PLEASE!?"
That's hilarious and I love it
A sorc holding onto the belief they are a wizard? If you have 10+ int they would be smart enough to know they aren't.
Int is knowledge, wis is awareness.
That whole interaction feels more low int not low wis. Your character noticed that they damaged the troll and shown fear...which is wis, not int.
I know being 'dumb' is not a nice way to feel but I would def say the character comes across having more wis than int in how you describe the interactions than low wis and average int.
Even ADHD itself comes off that way. You see/notice/look at everything and have issues focusing. "Ooh shiny!" is high wis low int. Being able to study and learning is high int. Lacking focus is low int (concentration is int based).
Hey fellow adventurers, last 'turn' I used my 'action' to cast a spell and the ogre looked scared 🧐 that's some strange rp
@@Nempo13 Psst, roleplay doesn't have to be limited by what stats your character has. As long as it makes sense to you and your table and everyone's having a good time, then nothing else matters.
For example, in one of my campaigns I'm playing an elderly cleric. Someone new recently joined in table so I had my character chat with his over supper so we can learn a bit about his backstory. After the conversation I said that my cleric keeps chattering on with small talk for the next hour or so for until it's time for bed.
The player wanted to roll deception so his character would appear engaged even though the small talk bored him. He got a 14. My cleric has a 16 passive insight so my character technically should have known the interest was forced. However I said my cleric was oblivious to this since it would be funnier to just keep on blissfully rambling on. No one objected and we all got a good laugh out of the new ranger trapped in small talk with the rambly old fart.
The most annoying thing I’ve seen is people removing other player’s agency by trying to control their character or cast spells that force them to do something on their turn. It makes players feel useless and gives off massive main character syndrome
Knowing your setting in detail can be a blessing and a curse to the table. You can help a lot with immersion and having big goals in the world that the DM can use to drive the action. But when the DM presents something that contradicts your knowledge of the setting, you need to have an understanding with them about how to sensitively respond: do they appreciate a quick side message about the canon lore, or are they building a story that purposefully deviates from the lore as you understand it? I had that conversation in Session Zero, and my DM invited corrections on the canon lore for the sake of the players who love the setting, but that's not a license to be a jerk about it. Also, there are plenty of times when I think, "That's not how I imagined this character would act, but it's my DM's take on this world, so let's roll with it!"
Yeah, especially when it's something that relates to your character. It's so touch and go with one of my DMs because dude has the memory of a goldfish for some things and a steel trap with others. So it's like "did he really forget my tiefling is part demon or are these devils at his former home making deals with his father on purpose?" Even just asking some DMs will get the metagame alarms blaring at some tables so I waited it out just to confirm he forgot and by then my arc had been riddled by inconsistencies...
I say this as a DM: The “Refusing to buy-in” thing is more often than not because of inexperienced DMs. A DM who does not do work to give the characters ample motivation for the characters to progress the story has done something wrong. That’s why you should always start by either a) letting your players know what kind of characters you want them to play, b) reading up on their backstories and giving them each a good reason to progress, or c) put them in a situation in which the only logical things to do progress the main quest.
actually that is where the famous "Session zero" comes into play, where the DM vagely explains what he wants in his campaign and the players give their input on what they want to play. THEN both the DM and each player should come up with a motivation together, that then can be written into the story. So the DM always has some clues about each character to steer them into a direction that will progress the plot.
Yes, but also everyone needs to be cool with PCs retiring if they have no reason to adventure. The price of player choice is that some choices lead to losing your character. That's just part of the game
@@trequorThe buy-in thing is one of the many reasons I stopped playing my first campaign. During the first session, we came up with that local children have been going missing and there’s a suspicious mansion on the hill. So as a local, my motivation was to go rescue the kids.
After several sessions of exploring the mansion, we found a mysterious orb and we (against my wishes) went back to town to get into on it. We found a wizard who would tell us about it, IF we agreed to do him a favor, any favor, later on-or else.
I was against this, but other players agreed, and eventually the wizard (ie the DM) decided that “we” had agreed to his conditions. The orb was a worthless thing and the wizard said he’ll give us our mission (that we “have to” do) after we rescue the kids.
We went back to the mansion, I ended up dying, the party resurrected me, and I said I’m retiring the character and not playing anymore.
I was interested in the haunted(?) mansion and rescuing the kids campaign, but once it moved away from that into the “real” campaign I completely lost interest. But like I said, this was one of many reasons I’ve stopped playing D&D.
@@LCDigital92 That's too bad. Retiring a character usually doesnt mean quitting the game (nevermind the whole hobby lol)
@@trequor I tried a couple other campaign and even RPGs, but fundamentally they’re not for me.
A point about DM ruling about how a spell or mechanic works. The DM must be consistent in it use.
One solution I find that helps me as a somewhat forgetful DM, and also seems to help put players at ease (works best on digital character sheets): add in clarifying text. If a decision markedly changes how someone thinks an ability works, making a note to clarify the change ensures that both player and DM remember what was decided.
Examples:
"When Fireball spreads around corners, its range is based on the length of the path the fire takes, not always a perfect circle from the point of origin."
"If a magic item allows you to cast a spell as an action, you can use that magic item for an opportunity attack granted by War Caster."
"The lump of brimstone conjured by this spell is a Small, irregularly shaped object with a soft and chalky consistency. It does not fill its square."
Yay, time to pull out my “tourist twins” story again!
The single WORST experience I’ve had as a DM was with these two completely jackass twin brothers who *say* they want to play an epic adventure, yet every time I present an adventure hook, of ANY KIND, they insist on skipping town and would drag the rest of the party with them and force me to improvise a backwater village where they can then force me to role-play the local milkmaid that they proceed to have non-consensual verbal sex with. They’ve ignored goblin raids, orc attacks, zombie uprising, stories of dragons kidnapping a princess, tales of buried treasure, a fucking magical castle falling into the middle of the town square, and each time these two jackasses would be like “that’s our cue to get out of here!”
I talked to them in private, in front of the others, calling out their bullshit during game, nothing works. Until finally I told them that their style is not meshing with my style and that they should maybe consider finding another group, and I shit you not these two fly into a hissy fit, one dumped his frappe onto my laptop while the other one threw a chair through my window, and they started to hurl verbal abuse at me about how I’m a failure as a DM and moreover a fail at being a human and I should go kill myself. I told them to leave my house before I call the cops on them, they do, but they kick my dog so hard as they’re leaving that they ruptured her spleen. They then proceeded to egg my house every other day while I filed restraining orders against them and when I finally took them to court for property damage and nearly killing my dog they kept shouting over me so much that the judge had to order them be restrained.
Turns out those two have been having problems since they were kids but always felt justified since “we think the same so we must be right”. What’s worse than a psychopath? A pair of psychopathic twins who builds off of one-another it seems…
To all you people thinking of replying“r/thathappened”, I see you, and while you might not believe me regardless of what I say, let me just put it here: everything I’ve written here really has happened, there are three people out there, the other members of this game group, who were equally traumatized by this experience as I was.
Glad your dog didn't die from it :(
Players skipping town kinda happened to me (They teleported into spelljammer, which wasn't planned by me, tho I did allow it), but sheeesh your story went in a completely unforeseen direction. These two sound like cartoon villains for real.
@@besthobbit she’s an old girl but still a big big girl (Labradooodle) it’ll probably take a truck to kill her. Still, kicking a dog hard enough to rupture her organ is still animal abuse, and while those asses are serving time for aggravated assault, my head canon is they’re serving time for attempted murder (against my fuwa fuwa baby girl)
@@starhalv2427 twins do be like that, they compete and collaborate with each other in everything. At best they both become extremely successful to one-up one another; at worst they fall into depravity using each other as excuses to delve deeper. I’ve met a few twins but these two are by FAR the worst.
@@1003JustinLaw
I only ever had contact with two pairs twins.
First twins, sisters and neighbours to my grandma's vacation house, were cool, I couldn't tell them apart at all but they didn't mind and just laughed at it (It was a gag for me to always ask which one they are, even when I knew), we were good friends- eventually they moved out and we lost contact tho.
Second twins were a bit more problematic, I met them on a sport camp my parents forced me to go on because I didn't like sport at all. These twins were kinda dicks to me, alongside other kids they made fun of me because I didn't do well at this sport at all, but when at the end of that camp I had a legit meltdown they were the ones, out of all the kids, to actually tell others "Hey, let's stop it, we crossed the line here", sit down listen to me about my issues and share their opinions, even shared a pretty sensitive topic about how they were often made fun of because they're twins in an attempt to make me feel better, so in the end they weren't as bad as I thought.
So yeah, you're on point, whether it be at their best or worst, twins are pretty much always together and agree with eachother, whether they're competing or working together.
Im SOOO caught up on Monty's first example of metagaming. Because out of all the examples he gave one of the player just saying a incorrect statement 😂😂😂.
I feel like metagaming is more like you as a player know the other player is a rogue so you don't trust them telling you he is a priest. Even though he's healing (through a feat) and is constantly praying. And you call them out for being a spy etc.
Now THAT is metagaming
The rogue in our actual campaign introduce themself as a merchant.
After the first few sessions he was scammed by another merchant and almost crit-oneshotted a mid-boss with 25-30 damage when the avg was 12.
Now the running joke during combats is yelling “do your merchant things!”
@@Valbu That's amazing haha
I made a very similar argument regarding knowing how to kill vampires.
I was playing an assassin who was friends with a family of lycanthropes. Lycanthropes hate vampires. When we walked into a town and started seeing signs of vampires, of course he knew what was up. He had spent the last 50 years listening to his friends bitch about vampires, and killing things was literally his job.
I said to the DM "if I, at 35, know how to kill vampires, then my 150 year old assassin who lives in a world with real vampires definitely knows how to kill a vampire"
I then proceeded to remove the steel arrow heads, so I was basically firing wooden stakes
I'm definitely in the "rehabilitate Rules Lawyer as a term" camp; I'm my tables' resident rules lawyer and every DM I have is grateful for it. I advocate for the rules, not the personal benefit. I am pretty good at inserting a quick "that's not the rule" while also only digging in if it's a substantial or important ruling. Just last session, the surprise rules were totally borked by the DM but I didn't even mention it until days later because the outcome didn't really change and it was a wicked complicated scenario. Even chatting 1 on 1 with the DM later took like a solid 20 minutes to walk through the whys and wherefores. NEVER would I tie up a session that long for something so minor. (it'd need to be an intentional unfair PC death to driev me to do that mid-session at which point I'd probably leave the game)
I also have had a couple antagonistic DMs who have changed rules mid-fight to benefit their desired outcome and on a couple of occasions reverted the rule back after insisting we abide by their change. To those like Monty for whom the term Rules Lawyer can't be rehabbed... what would you call such a "benevolent rules lawyer"?
I’ll call you “Rules connoisseur”
"White-Hat" rules lawyer?
@@ValbuFancy! I like it.
I get what you're saying here. When I'm not DM, I usually fit in this slot. When I DM though, and there's some rules dispute, I'll usually come up with a quick solution to the situation at hand ( just roll an ability check or something) ask if everyone concurs with the quick fix for now, and tell everyone we'll go over the specifics after the game or maybe even in the next session. It keeps the game flowing without stalling. Of course, when it really makes or breaks the game, we bust out our debating skills. In the end though, if everyone had their say I'll just pick the most logical ruling that came forth and declare that to be the rule from now on.
ruling justice advocate
"there must be a way to open it."
Me, the DM, expecting the door will be bypassed or ignored without being opened and literally having no clue what is immediately behind it:
I was getting really frustrated as a player with my first group (we were playing Shadowrun) - one player was a leopard turned human who obviously loved to hunt and didn’t mind brutally killing the bad guys and then feeding them to the zombies we had befriended. The other player was a young, innocent character „I can’t be part of this group if you keep murdering like this“ and we were all like…. This is Shadowrun. If you’re character can’t deal with situations like these it’s going to disrupt the game flow and if the murder hobo type player can’t stop unnecessarily provoking the sweet PC then that’s just adding unneeded conflict over the table bc that’s when things got personal… it really sucked and the campaign kinda just ended then without anyone bringing it up again.
This would've been resolved with a session 0 to discuss boundaries and expectations.
That kinda sucks. Too bad you couldn't work it out. The game even has things like the Boston rule. Somewhere in one of the books it mentioned that Shadowrunning in Boston is a bit different in that there's sort of a gentlemen's agreement that if a party tries to limit casualties that the wronged business will not seek much in the way of revenge. If your team is reckless, murderous, and over the top they will hunt you down for ruining it for everyone. With that sometimes the party polices itself.
we once played 7th Sea and my character was an Usurian shapeshifter (something in the line of a rural raised naive Russian werebear ) and when in the middle of the campaign another player killed a beaten opponent in cold blood ( what was for that character a story arc completion and totally fine ).
My take of my charakters morale was, that he would not condone such an action and consequently leave the group for his homelands... i created another character for the rest of teh campaign which the DM helped very much to fit in, giving me and our group fun times with my Eisen Greatsword Master ( a German knight with a very long blade if you will ) and i never looked back.
My point is, if you have the right DM and group, there is always a way to stay true to one's character concept, even if that means to retire it.
These are all excellent, and I think Monty's point about how most cases of players feeling unsafe are about people acting creepily is really important. The only one I would gently push back on is contradicting the DM; if they're deviating from the published rules *in a way that makes your character non-viable* --something like "you have to be hidden to get Sneak Attack" or "you can't cast any spells while you're concentrating"--then I think it's appropriate to politely say something to the effect of "I understand this is your table, but if we play with things that way it's going to make it difficult for my character to work. Could we do this by the book just for this session, and then talk afterwards about whether I need to make a different character?"
"My character would not do that." Okay. So stop playing that character and make one that will. Like you were told before you made your character.
Yep. I have a whole .txt of quirky character traits/ideas I'd like to use someday, but I always make it a rule to read/hear the campaign pitch and setting, and *only then* start thinking up my character. If I can't give a plausible reason why my PC is there and would be involved, I go back to the drawing board.
Once this wound up with a beastfolk monk (we were all being a little munchkin in our builds and I wanted the massive DEX buff). However, this gal didn't know anything about beastfolk culture and didn't even speak Beastspeech, because she was raised in a Dwarven monastery. Her first language was Dwarven, she acted more or less like a very reserved dwarf, and it confused the hell out of *every* NPC we met. That was a hoot.
See also: "it's what my character would do." In response to them being a chaotic good character doing something absolutely outlandishly evil.
@@TylerThompson-p5n Yeah, I hate that.
As someone who was very guilty of bossing players around, I have found that playing characters that are much more suited for follower positions (i.e. characters that are socially awkward or naive) and really dig into them, it helps so much.
I like this approach. Sometimes nerfing your projection into a character forces a player to use different colors to flesh that character out. It's a challenge, but it's rewarding.
Rules lawyer question: I feel like the most common situation I e come across this one is where a player has invested in a plan of action (either in combat or character development) based on a rule interpretation only to find out the DM has a different POV. Regardless of who I think is right, I feel pretty sympathetic to that person. Any tips for that specific situation?
For players: I'd give the guidance to always ask the DM and be honest about what your overall intentions are with a plan (it's not helpful to try to step by step walk the DM into a ruling where you're "tricking" them-- that's just unnecessarily adversarial). I think with experience playing you get a feeling for situations where the rules might be less clear, and you kind of know that you should just clarify it with the DM before you do that.
For DMs: encourage your players to act as above, and don't be adversarial when they have cool plans, otherwise they won't be honest with you about their intentions. Try to interpret what they want to achieve, and even if their specific plan might not work with your rulings, maybe there's a way you can offer to them that they could achieve the same thing in a different way that does fit in your rulings. Also, if you're offering a "you can try" with a cool plan, be clear what the likelihood of success is, and what the consequences of failure will be. That way the player doesn't feel that you've ruled them into a disadvantageous situation. They get to make the choice with eyes open.
@@tiffro this is good advice.
@@tiffro i am a DM/Player for more than 30 years and i approve this message 😇🤩
I've had this happen to me a few times as the DM, and I usually offer one of two potential compromises: 1. If the issue is significant, I'll just offer the player a replacement option (like a free respec or feat or boon that mostly provides what they want but in a less broken way) or 2. If the issue is more hypothetical, like if someone wants to play a summoner but I've had bad experiences with summoner PCs in the past that flood the battlefields with summons that gum up the game, or if someone wants to play a homebrew class, I'll straight up say that I'll allow it on a provisional basis subject to these concerns, but reserve the right to make changes if things get out of hand
Refusing to buy into the campaign always makes me scratch my head. Why in the heck are you even playing D&D to begin with?
Just had to ban two players from my table for several of these issues. We do milestone leveling on a fairly regular schedule, and everyone knows when it happens and to take time outside of sessions to level up their character. (I make time to meet up if anyone wants help.) These two were supposed veteran players but always showed up with none of the work done. They never knew what their characters could do or what items they had. One constantly did the lone wolf bit of "this is a stupid plan" and "I guess I'll pretend my character cares about this." The other would complain about not getting the spotlight, but his character never interacted with NPCs, even the ones he supposedly knew well. He wanted the plot to just cater to him automatically. He also complained constantly about taking damage despite being a fighter who ran headfirst into every combat. They both were constantly missing sessions (they were a couple) for things that supposedly couldn't be rescheduled, but they were messaging another player that they didn't care if they missed sessions and we should just cancel whenever. There was a lot of other stuff too, like constantly not paying attention. It was heavily affecting everyone else at the table, and any time we tried to ask if anything was wrong or they needed a break or had issues with the game, all we got was "everything is fine." My co-DM and I finally sent them a joint message very politely pointing out the issues we had seen and telling them we didn't think our table was the right fit for the kind of game they wanted. We were careful to clarify we still wanted to be friends and they were welcome at group dinners and movie nights. They both freaked out and accused us of a bunch of things, saying we were being aggressive and targeting them and had never wanted to be their friends anyway. It was paragraphs upon paragraphs of accusations and complaints. They also accused us of discriminating against them because they were both autistic, despite the fact that everyone at our table, including both DMs, is also autistic. When we offered to have a calm discussion, possibly in person, they said we were just looking to get more information to use against them. They then messaged the other people at the table behind our backs with a heavily modified version of events to make it look like we had been awful to them for no reason. Thankfully, we had already had several conversations with other people at the table about the issues other people saw and how it would be handled, so one believed them. If anything, the other players were really turned off by there behavior. Everyone has since cut them off, and now we're looking forward to running the rest of the game without all the drama, lol. But it was super affirming to see you guys list so many of their behaviors as actual problems, so thanks.
My daughter came home from kindergarten one day and said, "Jeff told me he was autistic, but he can't even color in the lines".
@@gustaafargoan That's amazing, lol. One of my kids had a phase when she was a bit younger where she kept saying autistic instead of artistic. Kids are hilarious.
That sounds like a terrible pair to have at the table! Glad they're gone!
@@nikolasversteeg We are too. We've had a couple sessions since removing them, and everyone has had a blast.
The engagement one is so real. My group has all four of us with adhd. I set up a pile of fidget toys in the center of the table for us.
I also recently a sketchbook because two of my players want to sketch things about their characters, and they were doing it in dry erase. This way they can keep it forever instead of wiping it lol
"If it's something you'd see in a Marvel movie..."
Deadpool just dropped a like 😂
Had a friend in high school that pulled me in because I played with high experience players and DMs. He kept trying to force main character status on me in storytelling. I had to have a long talk with him about why I came in. I was the experience in a pack of newbies and had expected to be support for him and the players, not a main character.
The game went better after and he's now one of the best DMs I know.
You guys are great!
I've done a few of these things before, and i learned the hard way not to do then. I left my last campaign because they exhibited almost every problem you list here. I haven't played a game since 😔
Some metagaming is acceptable. For example if someone goes alone to check on things, monster attacks and they are outnumbered, I think it would be acceptable if someone in the rest of the party said "they are taking too long, let's check what's up".
Regarding the "Arguing with the DM" part - I feel like very often this happens when players brew up some insane combo that they either though about themself or found online, and they keept it as a secret to blast it out as a surprise in a clutch situation. And if in that moment the DM says "Sorry but this doesnt work" then that players feels robbed of his glorious moment and might get subborn.
People should just tell their DM that they are planning this. "Hey DM, I was thinking about combining this magic item with this spell, and then when xyz happens then it blows up big time". This not only gives you confirmation from the DM, it also gives him an opportunity to set you up for this awesome moment.
One great thing I did in my currently going Drakkenheim campaign was that I created a seperate groupchat with each of my friends that is Titled "DoD: Character Name" and anything regarding their character is discussed in their. It makes it easy for them to ask "Hey can me maybe make sure xyz is sorted out soon?" and i can keep track of it easily without Susans Waterpark trip pictures in the way.
That would make things easier, but it also makes it a little less cool if you have told someone your secret mastermind move and you don't have that surprise moment anymore. Also, if the rules used are clear enough and the group agreed to play RAW then I, think it's fair to expect the DM to allow it and not homebrew their own rules on the spot.
regarding the time traveling plasmoid
personally plasmoid is one of my favourite races, but i also understand that as it is, it wouldn't fit into most campaigns. which is why often times i try to reflavour it. maybe it's just a regular slime given sentience, maybe it's a water elemental from the plane of water that wanted a change of scenery, maybe it is that spelljammer plasmoid, but it got stranded in that setting without any of its tech or anything. but in all of these cases the important thing to do is to work with the DM to say "hey. this is the kind of character i want to play, i know that at base it may not work with your campaign. what can i change to keep my vision for them, while still having them fit within your campaign?"
Let me send that to my players to wreak havoc upon the discord server
My golden rule of TTRPGs: It's everyone's job, including the DM, to make sure everyone is having as much fun as possible, including the DM.
The main tool to accomplish this is mature discussions at the appropriate time and session zero, session zero, session zero. Setting the right expectations and stating your deal breakers are crucial for having a fun game. I've been playing TTRPGs for nearly 30 years now and I've seen and made most of the mistakes mentioned here. I've gotten better and I still have plenty of work in several areas, but I'm making progress.
As someone with super ADD, I especially relate to that conversation. I don't know if I can do much about it other than knowing I simply can't do anything on the side because I'm going to get completely distracted. I'm not gonna read, watch RUclips, listen to music or anything like that when driving, so I'm not gonna do it when I play TTRPGs. Sometimes I get distracted anyways (at the table, not when I'm driving) and that's where my friends will just have to cut me some slack.
It's tough having a discussion about problem behaviors with people who are hopefully your friends but neither you or they will get better unless it happens. You can't fix something you don't know about.
I often find myself in a bit of a grey area at a table where I'm a player. The DM and all the other players are less experienced and not as rules savvy. Sometimes the DM looks to me for certain rulings or players will ask me if their character can do certain actions or combos rather than ask the DM. I find myself helping out and saying how I'd do things, or guiding to how something might work RAW but also making sure to bite my tongue to not overstep my boundaries. I'm still a player after all and I don't want to take anything away from the DM, but I also won't turn down advice when it's asked. It's a weird line to walk sometimes. Great table, really enjoying it and the DM is a great story teller and mood setter, just occasionally strange and I gotta be careful navigating it.
There's absolutely certain rules this table takes for granted that are flat out wrong but it doesn't matter, I say nothing because everyone is still having fun.
@@youtubewatcher9469 ah see now here's where you and I differ. Wouldn't you get pissed off if someone else decided to tell you what your role is? Do what's fun for you, and maybe between games offer friendly advice, suggest a spell or two.
Maybe a paladin concentrating on bless is better standing back a bit and doing some damage, especially if the DM is lenient and lets them smite with a thrown weapon
We had several DMs as players and the most frequent question during conversations was "yeah, but does your character know that?" We would enjoy doing things the character would do that we knew would not work. "That was dumb." Yeah, but that's what an angry half-drunk dwarf would do. "Oh yeah, true."
We had no problem role playing the characters and thought that was the most fun...not trying to "win" the game. To us, there was no way to lose D&D. It was all about pizza and board game breaks, and BS with friends. How can you lose?
Really wonderfully informative content, as always! Have you guys done a video already where you talk about safety tools for D&D? I'm really intrigued by that concept and would love to know more. I'm very new to the game, I'm neurodivergent, AND I'm shy, so having a variety of options to express myself is most welcome, and I'm very curious about what is available for safety tools.
35:00 I once had a campaign where we had a player that has severe arachnophobia. The DM refused to replace the spiders with stand in creatures with identical stats. She ended up leaving in tears after the DM kept describing the spiders attacking her. It was heart breaking.
That feels horribly spiteful on the part of the DM. I hope that player is okay
Sorry to hear about you Mom Kelly. Much love.
I’ve been the “why would I go on this quest? Why would my character care?” Player before, but it was because my DM had serially ignored my characters motivations. I also DM and I was so willing to work with him to come up with a narrative tie in for my characters backstory or something, but he consistently snubbed me.
What sucked is he just liked the other players more. He resented me irl and took it out on me in game.
I'm getting back into the game and have been appreciating and enjoying your advice across this and other videos!
Regarding the time-travelling plasmoid example, I'm of the inclination that as DM, I'd probably ask the player and the table if they'd be willing to work with me to make their backstory and motivation fit into the campaign. For example, I might have suggested that their plasmoid comes from a far future shaped by Straad winning, and where plasmoids are used as advanced blood sacs for vampires. If they're a pirate, maybe they're stealling and freeing other plasmoids from vampire control.
Here's the idea: You've come to the past by accident when escaping from your vampire tormentors, and you only vaguely know that this is an important point in history, but not much else. Now the adventure has this sense of importance to it, and the player has the fun flaw of being a most enticing treat for every vampire in the area. I forsee a fun tension being whether the player's character becomes the inspiration for vampires targeting plasmoids in the future?
Again, I'd want the whole table to be down with this before moving forward, but that's the point, communication and negotiation are key to coming up with fun for the whole group!
So true about the things to keep your hands busy to help focus your mind - I was at a whole day corporate planning day where the facilitators supplied a huge stack of pipe cleaners in a wide variety of colours on each table, and explained a the start of the day that they were there for us to fiddle with so that we could concentrate. It worked very well, although I will never know what the design purpose was of the weird pipe cleaner constructs I made while not thinking about them.
As someone who's been writing their own game as an introduction to RPGs, thank you, gentlemen, for your countless contributions to our shared spaces ✌️
I’m playing in a Tyranny game and I decided to let my hexblade warlock walk away on a different mission because I wasn’t feeling like she was adding to the story. I’m now playing a monk that has more buy-in to the plot. I’ve also noticed it’s been easier on the DM to engage my character as well.
"Failure can be just as fun as your successes"
That came up in the most recent session I was playing in (where incidentally we were playing Dungeons of Drakkenheim so... hi), where my Bard got hit by Feeblemind and failed his saving throw against it... I spent the rest of the session fully committing to the bit of playing a guy who basically was running purely on base instincts and could neither speak nor reason. We even flavored it once when we ran into some monsters in the city that they heard us because my Bard was basically just wailing like a baby over some random inconvenience.
Granted, it was much easier to commit to this bit for me being that I've kinda always played my character as the resident Comic Relief, like, even when he's *sane* he's generally on the silly side.
Safety tools are a good suggestion. I'm going to run a campsign soon-ish and I'll happily add these to session 0.
I left a campaign semi-recently because the DM never disclosed being absolutely unwilling to discuss *any* sort of concern or worry any player had. I had to find that out the hard way; basically the DM getting annoyed amd telling me to leave if I don't like what he's doing. This included some odd choices on his part.
Making my character a murderer as a cliffhanger, only to start session next time with "lol jk your victim is a flesh golem", while refusing to address my concerns privately for an entire week. Apparently I "seemed suicidal". I wasn't. My character didn't do anything like that, either.
He flat out refused to allow me to use an ability my character had, saying it doesn't work that way. Yes, it does. Everyone I spoke to, including strangers, everywhere I read, I even asked on the D&D discord...all said the ability works like I thought it does. DM refused to acknowledge. He also took away all players' rolls for no reason. It didn't speed things up. His excuse was "to preserve the mystery"...all we did was check doors for traps. "But if you roll an 18 then that will influence your decisions vs if you didn't know whether or not the door is trapped" ...dude, if you don't want us to know, there has to be better ways than taking all of our rolls away. I brought that up, too. It was confusing for all of us
DM just got really annoyed, again, because apparently he's the kind of person who absolutely can't handle anything that isn't positive or praise. Heavily hinted I should leave and that he didn't care of everyone else left too. The other players did nothing wrong there. I may have brought up a thing or two I wasn't happy with, but I don't think I'm the problem player. He wasn't willing to have a conversation about it like adults. Instead he got upset, blamed me for everything, and refused to speak to me any further. It would be weeks until we'd have next session due to holidays. I left. I don't want to play with that jerk anymore. Led to cutting ties with that group entirely, as they stopped talking to me as well, and kept canceling the sessions I was running for them (minus that DM), while they still had their sessions with him. Guess the DM must've talked shit about me.
Whatever, though. I'm better off now. Point is, just be willing to talk to one another. Dusclose these kind of things, even if you aren't proud of them. I mean, the guy has been a DM for years. I do not believe that I'm the first and only player to *ever* bring up a concern, in a polite fashion. This couldn't have been a surprise for him. He just never told us and we'd find out by trying to talk and get shut down with basically "shut up and roll with it, or else just fucking leave".
Yes, the DM gets the final say. Sure. But does this include taking away rolls and abilities for no real reason, and then I'm not allowed to try and have a discussion about it? I don't think so. If he could give me a reasonable explanation for why he did these things, ok, fair enough. But he refused to talk about it at all. I do not think "shut up and deal with it, or else" is a healthy attitude for a DM to have. It depends on context, but players are not necessarily "wrong" for having a discussion about it after session, and the DM doesn't always get a free pass just for being the DM.
The problem with safety tools is that they are easily abused. Not only that, but some of the worst kinds of players are drawn to abuse them. It's just another problem for the table.
AFI sing the sorrow is by far one of my all time favorite albums. It's so refreshing to see someone wearing that shirt still. 😊
In regards to boundaries, my perspective differs a bit from Monty's observations about most issues being out-of-game, player interaction issues. Rather, I have experienced DMs and other players using real-world racist troupes and stereotypes (including offensive voice patterns) in-game, or using the fantasy setting to be able to exercise in-game their mean-spirit and hate towards people who are different than them. Sometimes it has been shocking, enough to make me feel unsafe. So my hope is that DMs also consider not just the degree of violence and adult content at their table, and what their players are comfortable with, but that everyone around the table considers the representation of various communities.
I'm so excited, I just got my Sebastian Crowe's guide! They have made it to Australia. Beautiful book and maps, great GM screen, minis and cards are excellent quality! Thank you dudes 🎉
To add to the "Being Unprepared" section, if I may, be prepared to actually participate. And this isn't just "being engaged". You can show up, be engaged at a minimal level, not being on your phone, but still not prepared to actually participate. I did this a few months ago. I was going through a bout of depression and showed up for a session that I shouldn't have showed up to. My DM, rightfully, called me out on it.
It's sad that "don't harass other players or do drugs in front of them" is something that needs to be explained.
I played together with a dude for like 5 years that never grasped the core rules and always brought the game to a grinding halt when it was his turn, he was hyped for coming up with characters but as soon as he played them he was distracted with drawing and never knew what the group was doing nor what his character was capable off..
My whole group are on the spectrum but that player didnt really hide that he had no interest in the story we were all playing
The not respecting boundaries is the most important. I made an Aarakockra wizard, set on mastering the elements and was kind and and adventurous, but my DM brought us to a city ruled by Graz’zt and there was this huge party. I felt uncomfortable when other players described how they had sex, and when I went into a tavern for some meat for my pet and worms for myself, there were naked dancers, I felt uncomfortable and I regret not sharing that before I left that session. When you feel uncomfortable with another player or the DM, say something.
I haven't DMed for decades (2nd edition), but I had the displeasure of having a few metagamers and cheaters at my table. I was running a modified version of Castle Amber (mostly that the placed treasure was different or simply didn't exist), and these players insisting on "searching" rooms where "they knew" there was "supposed to be treasure there". Mind you, I knew that some of the players would be familiar with the module and they agreed beforehand to not metagame - they lied. I also had cheaters, in that they would quickly grab up low rolls, saying they were a "cock dice". They would also not keep track of HP or spells used. This behavior made it un-fun for the DM and the other players.
"doesn't mean you're Fighting the exact troll from the monster manual"
Isn't the main thing with trolls that they are so rapidly mutating that you would not expect any two to be the same?
You mentioned "gracefully removing" someone as a last resort. Have you ever made a video on how to do that? The only one I can find on RUclips is from DM Lair, and I don't really want to trust that guy on a social issue.
It's so good to hear you guys talk about this so candidly. I could have been right there with you talking about this 😂
I too am a DM who likes games ran a certain way, so I DM more than I play.
RE: 35:50 Monty says most boundary-crossing errors he sees are related NOT to game-stuff, but other more RL-related topics. I just thought it worth adding to what they said around this subject; the "old saying" about "not discussing religion or politics among friends/fam".
12:56 I recently played a one shot as a ranger. But I had such short notice I turned up without a complete character sheet, I was expecting a little discussion at the start to make sure we were all ready, instead the DM jumped us straight into an encounter, which was especially embarrassing when I realised I didn’t know what my AC was (luckily I didn’t get hit in that one). So I spent the entire one shot modding the sheet and looking up spells to add when needed. To be fair I was given permission to do this, and I ultimately only used hunter's mark.
Believe it or not other people struggled with their characters more than me in that session.
45:26 I this applies more for this time stamp, but it was the "changing spells mid-comment" that reminded me.
My personal issue:
Just the basic lack of common courteousy.
I didn't even start playing, I just asked if I could sit-in and watch and listen.
"Do you have any experience?"
"Not yet. I'm getting into it. I wanna see how you guys do it. I've been watching watched Dungeon Dudes, Dem 20, Critical Ro-"
"THATS NOT REAL!"
"Ohhh-kay"
*as I'm walking away*
"That's just a bunch of rich actors ruining everything because they have money and-"
*I walked out the door* saying "this won't work out"
I wanted to watch, learn, be quiet, and I was just answering YOUR QUESTION.
And I'm getting interrupted by just answering a question? I'd rather NEVER play honestly
One of the current "mistakes" in our campaign is my wife jumping in and asking a whole bunch of questions when my character is alone with a few NPC's who know his secret. She felt real bad about it when she realized she was doing it, but got a simple "We all do it at some point" from my best friend and I. It ended up with us just putting her in the room with me, and having a laugh over the "You're all asleep!" scene from the first Gamers movie.
Let's face it, it gets real hard at times to step back and try to keep out of the fun when something exciting is happening to someone else’s character.
Something equally toxic I did once as DM to a metagaming player was that one time during combat, every time he mentioned "this monster should only have 27 hit points" I gave it an extra 10 hit points, I think he called it out enough so it ended up having almost 100 hp by the time the level 3 party defeated it.
As a person who loves to play the face, I like to say things like "Guys, back me up" so I'm not the only one talking.
Also, diverting NPCs attention so the stealthier characters can sneak where they need to go
A part of "Not Playing Collaboratively" is that D&D is a team game, so it can sometimes ride the line between discussing tactics during combat and trying to play the whole party.
Cue some DM making a game where your characters make character sheets, and roleplay being bad players roleplaying 2nd-step game characters badly by having these traits.
It's a FUN placeholder when your campaign is not quite ready. Or make fun of a bad player that was kicked out...
I recently was a player in my friend's campaign (I'm the forever DM of my group), and I was playing a monk. We went through an entire combat, after which I realised that I had been playing my level 3 monk as if I had Extra Attack. No one had noticed, probably because I was playing a monk. Biggest rules blunder I have made as a player.
Really loving these longer format videos!
Ah yeah. While my group's main game is on hiatus one of the players started a oneshot and first night only I showed up so we did a sort of introductory play of my character splitting from the group to do a small one person job to just play and flesh out the town etc. I stumbled more into the mystery of what was going on than I expected to and had meta knowledge on a monster that attacked me and an npc I was following on suspicions. I I thought I knew what the monster was, based on a dnd story I listened to on yt a while ago. I told him as much afterwards and said I'd try not to metagame but this never really happened to me before. Sadly that fell apart from people being too busy but I was worried about accidentally letting my assumptions interfere with the game.
42:09 at my table, the context of the words "bonus action" have led me to allow another full action as a bonus action, including attacks, UNLESS their class has 2 attacks already. At that point, i reduce it to a normal bonus action.
I love to share the spotlight so to speak. As an example my character is very stubborn and reckless. So I momentarily took the spotlight, jumped in the room and casted thunderwave and punched a bunch of people. After that the enemies ganged up and beat me down to one hit point, tossing me out of the room. (I’m a level 3 monk/wizard) now what? “Guys help!” *tooth falls out*. And for the rest of the combat I’m working with everyone and staying in the back to cast the spells everyone else needs to have their moments. Because I chose to have a heroic turns comedic moment, which lends itself well to passing the torch.
Just an example of how to do this. But on the flip side I have found that when it comes to strategy I tend to overtalk. But I try to ask people what they think or step back and reserve my ideas at times 30:58
I have chronic health issues, and I always feel bad when I cancel, which is sadly often. Thankfully my group is very understanding of my issues.
Great video and advice dudes! Especially on working with the party and other people at the table to avoid these.
Just one thing. The example with the goblin boss for metagaming is kinda hard to avoid though. if you know how much hit points the monster usually has, you can't just forget that information. Someone pointing out that the monster has more hit points than usual or that it "should have" isn't a great example. Was pointing it out necessary? Probably not. But it certainly isn't "catching them metagaming".
Me and most of my players are also DM’s. And a thing that we end up doing is asking if a creature is vulnerable to a damage type immediately after we hit it with said damage type. An example we had just yesterday we fought a mummy and one of the players hit it with Necrotic Damage, which it was immune to, and then it was hit with Fire. To which I asked “aren’t mummies vulnerable to fire?” To which he responded: “Maybe.”
One of the things I've really appreciated about playing as an Artificer and using several of my infusions (and crafting down-time) on other players- it's all but guaranteed I can't accidentally slip into trying to a main character.
46:29 - 3 fucking years our Paladin used Vow of Enmity 5 times, never remembered auras and her spells to remove debuffs...
40:10 I had someone teasing me about playing a female character in an all male party, saying I was doing it to have "relations" with npcs and pcs in the game and that was the reason. It was really rather hurtful to say that my motivation was because of that. Not everyone is motivated by lust.
RE: Metagaming - If nothing else, using fire for trolls or stakes though the heart for vampires would probably be solutions that adventurers could stumble upon simply because they're already pretty reliable ways to kill most things.
RE: Cheating - What if the character was someone who has access to such knowledge (like a researcher wizard whose spellbook was also an in-universe equivalent to the Monster Manual)?
In my first Pathfinder game, I'm planning to play an arrogant/overconfident Psychic that believes they're destined to become the strongest spellcaster in the world due to their natural talent in magic.
Can I get some ideas in the comments about how to avoid the third issue listed in this video while playing that kind of character?
Avoiding some amount of metagaming can be tough when the players know a lot about the setting and monsters. Sometimes it's best to just address this explicitly so players don't feel like their character has to waste a turn hurling a lightning bolt at that Shambling Mound just to be a good sport, bc their character wouldn't know better.
I like introducing skill checks to formally confirm whether the characters know or can infer things about monsters. Nature to know or observe something about a beast; Arcana for constructs; maybe Religion for undead. If the roll succeeds DM confirms one piece of info their character knows, like one of their saves or their max hp. Can your character tell how many Mephits her Sleep spell will likely affect? Well, how healthy and hearty do they look - roll a Medicine check maybe.
I also like that this can reward players for investing in skill proficiencies that don't come up as often as, say, Perception. And if the rolls slow combat down too much, you can just run them like passive checks.
I have a habit of rules lawyering, but I try to make even, correcting both DM and players, and always couch it under "technically, the rule is -this-, but it's up to the DM", cause sometimes people misread things, or forget things. I know as a DM, I greatly appreciate when my players try to help me out, so long as they're ok with me telling them "that is the base rules, but this is how we're gonna run it."
On refusing to buy in to the campaign/adventure - there ARE exceptions that are justifiable. I have been in games where the GM set up scenarios that were specifically against the motivations of my/our characters, which were already agreed to - or EVEN given to us by the GM (at conventions). Don't tell me I'm a selfish dark side star wars character, and then expect me not to assassinate my teammates to collect the full bounty for myself. Don't say 'you can make up a heroic noble hero' and then expect us to delve into a property legitimately owned by someone with only the temptation of stealing valuables. So, yes - players should follow this principle, just as the GM should follow the principle of understanding and building around the motivations of the PCs.
The thing that really winds me up is players (particularly spell casters) who then it gets to their turn and they go, oh ummm let me see what can i do here ummm and then saying, what spells do i have ummm.
FFS know your spells if your a spell caster and plan before your turn what you want to do! 😠
For 'coaching' I think - other than if someone asks obviously- the only time it's appropriate to jump in, is if what they're going to do would undo what someone else has done.
For example, the amount of times I've seen a cleric use turn undead, half the monsters start fleeing, half remain and then people who weren't paying attention when the cleric read turn undead start attacking the fleeing undead is staggering. This turns the clerics cool moment into a complete waste. I think a 'hey, that will undo the turn' I'd appropriate there and similar situations.
One time I felt very unprepared for a game of D&D. It was my first time playing a melee attacker, and I had previously always been spell caster characters. Once we got going, I realized that I didn't actually fully understand the physical side of combat. It was pretty embarrassing, because it kept slowing things down.