@@Zetact_ A big part of the story is that the monster won't call himself that unless the doctor recognizes him as such, and he never did. But, that's beside the point. I'm saying the doctor is the monster of the story, not his creation so much.
No I'm pretty sure the 9 foot tall waking corpse that murdered innocent people was the monster. The scientist who made it, passed out, and assumed the whole thing was kinda hallucination was a moron and and asshole, but far from a monster.
@@alexanderchippel He abandoned his child in disgust. He was entirely responsible for what the creature became, and he shirked that. You'll come to realize that. That's what wisdom is.
@@Dark_Jaguar He didn't "abandon his child in disgust" he made an 8ft tall zombie and when he realized he created an abomination he had a panic attack and fainted. When he woke up, it had wandered off. Yes he was responsible for it but he didn't shirk off the responsibility, he didn't realize that the responsibility actually existed. He thought it was a fever dream because when he woke up it wasn't around. Intelligence is actually reading the book and comprehending the literal events that are described in the book, and wisdom is understanding the messages. There's two messages. The first one is that you should not tamper with nature recklessly. The second one is that being dealt a bad hand in life is not an excuse to hurt others. The creature murdered a child. And then purposely framed in innocent woman. He knew doing both of those things were wrong but he did them anyway. Why? Because he's a monster.
The saddest part is that this could have been a great character interaction and role play moment but because the DM didn't tell them yes or no or say explicitly 'the only way to tell is to let it hatch', it was exclusively an out of character argument.
The DM told the party that the bard knows everything - he gave the bard full control over the lore. The bards word is gospel in regards to black dragons. The druid simply didn't like what the bard decided to go with and thereby didn't respect the DMs response.
@@stammesbruder That wasn’t clarified, though. Most DMs don’t give their players that level of vague control over the lore without interference (either via agreeing or disagreeing), usually only stuff that’s brought up in session 0 and pertains strictly to your character. So it’s not weird to be suspicious that what he was saying wasn’t 1000% true in meta, and if it WAS, the DM should’ve spoken up and said so, like Crit said. Moreover, this word of his thats supposedly gospel doesn’t make the druids argument invalid. Most races in DND aren’t inherently evil, so even if the bard brings up that argument it makes complete sense that other people (not just the Druid mind you, the whole PARTY was fine with him keeping it) would bring up the counterargument of nothing being inherently evil and nature vs nurture.
@@stammesbruder the bard knowing everything doesn't imply he can decide the lore. It means he can ask the DM and get an answer about anything on this topic.
I remember how in our OotA game, when we finally convinced DM, that yes, we do get out with OUR dragon egg, the cleric of Bahamut (who was absent in that session) later was rping the turmoil, how "Tiamat is the source of power for chromatic dragons" or something along those line, and my simple-minded barbarian replied with "Well, it's just an egg, can't you ask your god to replace the power source for the egg?" Basically baptising the egg and getting a gold dragon egg in return. (:
I played a dragon blood sorcerer minotaur with a glamor headdress that let him look like a Dragonborn. He had gained access to 3 black dragon eggs and 1 silver dragon egg. The idea that they were evil was brought up. It was simply dealt with by my character saying, "ha! Who cares! Is a fucking dragon! Besides... what's better, being born good or being able to overcome your own nature? I'll raise em right, don't you worry."
Steve: *planned from the beginning that the first part will be a fight to the death* Also Steve: *makes the characters, including a character with no combat ability* Also Also Steve: *is surprised when a character HE MADE is ill-suited to what HE PLANNED*
If a craftsman is supposed to participate in a tournament, I would give the benefit of the doubt, that there was something at least somewhat fair planned out - any character could fail in a fight to the death. It's no less of an "all or nothing" situation for every other player.
I DMed a game of dnd and the party found some eggs, and after some rolls, they figured out theyre dragon's eggs. They have 2 options distroy them or keep them. They knew they were black. The characters, not the players. Debated back and forth about their options. They casted a vote they took the eggs. I just gave some info as dm, and characters used player knowledge about dragons and alignment(which was loose) so they have 3 black dragon eggs. 1 went to a shaderkai elf and used a ritual to send it to the raven queen. After the campaign and has reached a decent trustworthy standing with her. Granted him the black dragon, but has been twisted to be a shadow dragon. It was going to be his ultimate prize for collecting the huge amount of objects and knowledge for the queen. Each player at the end came out with some boon or has progressed their characters backstory that they can make new goals or keep going with the ones they have. I have a artificer making a large golem of his own design use materials from everything they collected. The trade off its going to a devil, to complete the bargain they have.
So confused why Steve and Carmen didn’t just have an above table conversation about what she wanted for her character. They’re literally married so what’s the excuse there? 🙃
@@Kris-wo4pj But it could also be the other way round. I understand that its an RP, but if your SO isn't comfortable with smth then it isn't cool either. Cause the character that Carmen was playing wasn't just any character, it was a character for her to explore about her sexuality, in front of him. So I could understand Steve being uncomfortable with his wife metaphorically getting it on with other people, in front of him. And cucking him at the end was too much i think. Idk, i just can't imagine myself doing any of those things as either parties. Carmen just seems to not want to be with steve imo, for obvious reasons, cause that just seems like a toxic relationship.
Ran “Tyranny of Dragons” for my group and they had the same argument about the dragon eggs, but it came down to convincing the bard that just because dragons killed his family didn’t mean these dragons deserved to die. He ended up spoiling the little monsters rotten, like chihuahuas.
I once played a dwarf woodcarver, specifically a toymaker. I know what my future metalsmith dwarf will be doing during downtime! Onf Bronze-Spoon will be the best spoonsmith there ever was!
I never did/joined a D&D game, only listened to the several stories from RUclips, but i must say the spoonman of the iron throne part has to be one of the best revenge setups i ever heard, pure 10/10. Shit like this is what makes me keep listening to D&D stories.
You should try it one day, preferably not online, if you try online you will find out the cult of (insert stupid trend here) and that's not cool. I have many stories, from halfling girl Seiya knocking out an ogre on first strike. To the one time one of my friends destroyed a campaign by pure stupidity, to the one I got a vampire knocked out by a policeman that somehow managed to hit me in a dark night with a huge swarm of insects blocking his shooting so he needed to roll 9s or 10s to hit (no DM screen on this one so we all see that miracle) Online is... Awful most of time, I think I even met Sierra and Delta.
I recommend some stories • Puffin Fotest material for laugh • Tthewritter with "Spoony the Bard" Tthewritter has very good stories some of them made me drop a tear.
I mean the dude was a bard. The DM could have made up something about an in-universe historical epic poem about a good black dragon. That would have been so cool!
Had players arguing over an egg (a hydra this time) in one of my Demon Hunters games. They were much more civilised about it. They talked a bit then agreed to use opposed intimidate rolls. One player now has a hydra sidekick.
That's really smart of op to do the spoon thing. I'm so glad both of my DMS are amazing. Gosh stories like these really make you appreciate what you have.
Depending on setting dragons in 3.5e aren't always set alignments, Eberron being the obvious exception. There's plenty of times that alignments of more innately ("always") good/evil creatures (dragons, demons, etc) are changed in various campaign modules because of the story as well.
I've wanted to try D&D for a long time. But didn't know where to start, assumed I'd somehow mess up the game for everyone else or just be an intrusion. I stumbled onto this channel a few months ago and binged the stories (all hail our crab lord etc). That people might actually want new players around was something of a revelation. Well I turn 40 very soon and I figured... I can't be as bad as some of these guys and finally just got myself an account on Roll20. Worst case, I might have some content offer here. I'm off to find a game 0, thank you for the gentle push xx
This seems to be a rare case bad dnd being better than no dnd because this is just too funny. Hell this is the true dm vs player because it seems like most of the people were just there to spite Steve at one point or another.
Spoonman of the iron throne. That sounds like such a deceptively difficult Bossfight in dark souls. He throws sharpen spoons like throwing knives, He is chain mail armor made of spoons, and he wields a giant great sword style weapon shaped like a spoon. And if you get hit by it, you spend a good long three second eternity face down on the ground before you pick yourself back up.
3.5 is my goto when it comes to D&D, while there is a ton of books to go through the Monster Manual explains the alignments to anyone who cares to read it, which did not seem to be the DM "Steve" or the players arguing it. In the case of "Always" the book states rare exceptions can deviate from the listed alignment. In the worlds I ran the PCs were always rare exceptions and by extension their companions.
Well, now it’s not exception, it’s the norm. Wizards firmly decided to adopt nurture approach. And universal acceptance. You can literally be tentacled monster in Ravenloft and as it is written, no one should react at it with xenophobia. Because people of mists are used to strange things… god, I hate Van Richten guide to Ravenloft…
Not to mention that, in older DnD at least, dragons were basically inherently a specific alignment based on their scale color because of a combination of Bahamut/Tiamat influence and the idea that draconic blood was so powerful that it shaped even the personalities of those who possessed it. Now I get the idea that raising a chromatic dragon could produce a good variant with proper parenting and hey, that can make for a great story, but the lore establishes the fact they are defaultly evil pretty clearly in 3.5. As in, evil from birth.
I'm actually in a Pathfinder 1e campaign right now, which is based off D&D 3.5e, and have chops going back to D&D 3.5 direct. Whether back then or now, no DM/GM I knew ever played it where all creatures had to be Evil. In the old 3.5 days, it was a surprise rarity, but it still was known to happen, with the exception of stuff like Demons and other otherworldly beings where ALL were their stated alignment. Now, we treat it as a "suggestion" rather then a rule, and even otherworldy beings can (VERY rarely) be some alignment other then what they're "supoposed" to be. It's just more fun to do, whether your intent is to keep players on their toes or to have more wiggle room in your story.
So an easy way to sort out the black dragon thing in game would probably have been something like this: "Black dragons are inherently evil and possess a strong joy for killing living things, they are considered one of if not the most evil of the chromatic dragons. However there does exist the possibility to change the the dragon's alignment depending on how you raise it, if left to it's own devices they tend toward evil and always will. All dragons when hatched have an inherent knowledge of what they are and the desires they possess, most dragons are capable from the moment they hatch and will begin to take actions to keep themselves safe as they grow until they reach a large enough size they can defend themselves." Basically it's possible to raise a chromatic dragon to not be evil but it's usually not worth the effort as if you fail it will probably dispose of you when it can.
I think the problem here was that the alignment debate was not really a character conflict, it was a player conflict about the rules. When Maple Wallflower the druid and Muschle Massiveson the barbarian debate about the morality of meat consumption it's an interesting RP moment. When druid player and barbarian player argue about wheter it's legal to eat meat according to the rules, it's something that the DM should clarify. You can defend opinions in character that you, the player know that is "wrong" (like not believing that eating meat is illegal, or wanting a good steak even though you know that it is), but when it's more about the players disagreeing on how something works in the world, it's stupid to not say anything.
All hail Spoonman! Edit: Also, I'm willing to bet that Steve thought he could pull that because he thinks he ACTUALLY did that with Carmen. Since she's bi, even if she hadn't had a significant other that was a woman since they'd met but before they got together, I wouldn't be surprised.
That would maybe mildly excuse the level of 'you just haven't found the right man yet' treatment of a lesbian character, but not the pushing and pursuing a character that is explicitly in a relationship. That's just some major red flags for both the character and Steven himself.
while having the characters argue whether a dragon egg is safe or not is definitely a good plot, when your players start arguing out of character, just tell them out of character, especially if one of them "knows all about the egg" if i's safe or not and have them roleplay the rest of the argument if they want
If you have a degree in political science and think that "Poor people aren't trying hard enough", you have effectively spent years studying without understanding a thing.
I like how OP thinks that having different D&D play styles means that Steve and his wife were destined for a divorce. Weeb priorities, there is so much more to life.
I’d argue that certain monsters are inherently “evil” but I’d read the alignment for the MM as ‘hostility’, but Dragons are incredibly intelligent, and I would rule they aren’t one set alignment
I was helping to run games in a big community Westmarches-style setting once. Gave a party a baby manticore, which of course they named and kept. Community managers went ballistic over "manticores are all evil and that monster isn't allowed in town". Started a civil disobedience insurrection that resulted in a player actually leaving after the guards murdered the baby manticore. Kind of established a tone of "players vs managers" conflict that haunted the rest of the game. Lesson: never fuck with player pets. On the last story, fruitlessly trying to convert a lesbian is very on-brand for Zap Brannigan, but it doesn't sound like Steve actually understood the joke.
What people say means a lot whether they mean it or not. They shouldn't divorce over something so silly, but it's interesting that a married couple can fail to play with each other's cues so many times in a row without shaking things up
"It's not necessarily the DM's job to squash every disagreement between party members." - Darn right, I enjoy causing them on occasion. Nothing like dangling a great deal from an enemy - "it's all upside, this makes a lot of sense and we can always turn on him later!" "DID YOU FORGET HE TRIED TO KIDNAP ME A WEEK AGO?" Beautiful, as long as it's in character.
I recently accidnetly tpk'd a party because i made a reference to you it was a 5 health crab that always crits they kept missing it and it eventuly killed them now the druid has it tamed because a npc brought them back and they started throwing it enemies (they made it tiny plate armor)
Is it bad that I'm hoping he's a bard who made spoons so the old line of "You Spoony Bard!" can fit here in a different context? I don't know 3.5 at all, however, but one can always hope lol
when you were partying i was crafting spoons when you were fighting i was crafting spoons when you were laughing i was crafiting teaspoons and now you dare to ask me for salvation?
Small issue I have. Op claims 3.5e just lists the alignment. This is incorrect. Monsters like goblins and orcs have “usually chaotic evil” in their stat block. While I’m 3.5e black dragons *do* have “always lawful evil” even that isn’t set in stone. Some creatures even have what percentages of their population are what alignment
Even then, the Draconomicon explains why dragons have high mental stas from the moment they are born and why they gravitate to an alligment: genetic memory. BUT they can still change with experiences. So a newborn black dragon will be a megalomaniac lizard, but you can teach them to behave
@@Grunt10010 Yeah it was like "Hey here's 98% of what this creature is" like the creature got to prove to you that it isn't evil and even then black dragons and green dragons are both fucking social monsters and tricksters so is it really good or is it pulling a scheme. There's an edge factor that both evil races and evil monsters can have and its awesome.
It's a history check. He can say "You know everything about them" and not answer whether it's possible to raise a black dragon good. You could answer whether it has been done before. My group would eat this shit up because it's the DM's world, not wizards', so we'd all get to see how it all plays out and learn how his world functions.
What some people need to realize like that DM should, is if you say they know everything about the black dragons it is their character, not their player that knows. you still need to make admin decision about what happens and clarify when issues arise.
Going to repeat what I commented on the first story with some added context: "Steve should write his own book but I doubt anyone would suffer through his two billion page epic, *AND* Steve should make his own TTRPG system but I don't think anyone wants to read a 100 page document about character creation alone." He's clearly someone who wants an audience and thinks he deserves it without putting in any of the effort to get said audience.
I would question why Steve in making a GoT set of characters would think that a Maester would willingly go into a tournament to the death, or be called dishonourable for refusing, but then I remembered he’s an idiot. I’d also like to know how giving everyone in King's landing a silver spoon ruins the campaign.
I will say this, Zapp Brannigan is hilarious and i could totally see him trying to win over a lesbian...even going just as far as steve took the idea and probably a little further. Zapp would also just be way too thick headed to understand why he wasn't making any progress. Even after the fleet wide communication he would still try to win her over. Let's try and come up with some Zapp pick-up lines that he would try on a lesbian who just got engaged. "2 is ok but 3 is a party", "Why use a cheap plastic toy when you can have the real thing?", "1+1= you and me...+1 more if you'd like to bring your wife along", and i'm sure there are more out there because he's that funny a character. So, what Zapp Brannigan pick-up lines can you people come up with to woo a lesbian?
"You like women? I do too! How about you, your partner, and I return to my chambers and compete to see who likes them better?" In my mind the way I would see it playing out for Zapp would be either complete, head scratching obliviousness to the concept or thinking it's just a guaranteed shot at a menage a trois.
I feel for that last guy, imagine thinking your wife has joined you and your friends for a game and she just wants to explore fantasies that have nothing to do with you. I’m surprised they’re still married considering she very clearly is down bad for ladies and not her husband 😂
Hey, New subscriber here. I got hooked by the Main character throws Tantrum video then checked both Steve saga's material , so naturally I subscribed. What I find amusing and special of your material is analyzing where it all went wrong and what could've been done about it. I consider it clever advice. Be aware that some might find it pretensious (because it involves superior knowledge of the theme than the DM or author), but I find it necessary to disect the session bypassing that "moral" or "ethical" dilemma in order to achieve knowledge and improve. The final issue is that some people might consider toxic to negatively talk bad things about someone else's work. I find it as constructive criticism since you make proposals to improve.
All hail the Spoonman of the Iron Throne! The weird thing is that Steve’s campaigns individually sound fascinating and fun! I just think they’d need to be in the hands of another DM
I wonder if "inherently evil" is even applicable to animals. Like there are people who keep tigers as pets to sad results. Not sure that keeping dragon is that different. They are not domesticated.
The "you now know everything about Dragons" thing was handled backwards. It should be that the Bard can then ask any question about the Dragon and have it immediately answered by the DM truthfully; the facts of the world are still decided by the DM, it's just that the Bard has instant access to that knowledge. But here the DM bunked it; he let the Bard just _decide reality by himself_ without the DM's authority. Knowledge is descriptive, not prescriptive. The Bard shouldn't be able to warp reality to what he "thinks should be right", it should be the DM's say that the Bard is just privy to.
I think rolling animal handling on a baby dragon would be like rolling animal handling on a druid in wildshape, just cause it looks animalistic doesn't mean it's got the brain of an animal (I mean a black dragon wyrmling, AKA a newborn has an intelligence of 10 and can speak Draconic).
The 3.5 rules did say that the black dragons were "always chaotic evil". It contained the "usually" language for Orcs, Goblins and such, but dragons had the "always" language the same as celestials and demons. I could definitely see the argument that it shouldn't have been that way, but the asshole player is technically correct in this instance unless the DM overruled it and said their world differed from the default rules settings.
It in fact does say usually evil or usually good in 3.5. I'm a 3.5 vet with over 10 years player/DM experience and lots of creatures have the "usually" preface for their alignment.
I would of said, its a wild creature and no mater how you train it, eventually, when it becomes and adult, it would also become unpredictable, it could kill you or others in its flustration.
I can't wait for the future where Black Holes could be used as weapons, and these titles would say stuff like, "Guy goes DARK ION (Idk ran out of ideas) on DM!!!"
Whenever a DM tells a player rules for some crafting offtime, says something like "but you can only sell it for the marketprice" and the player answers "oh, I can work with that" with a smile; you should definetely know that the campaign is going to be derailed ^^
For monsters like dragons that are intelligent, it's better for them to have a natural predisposition towards certain behaviors based on their scale color, like, say, an instinct to use their breath weapon when angry, or a getting alarmingly angry at specific categories of behavior of those around them that run counter to what their instincts tell them, but be able to restrain themselves from carrying out evil actions if raised in the right environment. Basically, dragons should be treated as someone with potentially explosive anger issues and talked down from evil actions until they learn how to manage themselves.
The weird part about the second one is that he gave him a premade character that can't fight and then said fight to the death vs many other types of people. Unless there is a maester slap fight round with 1 dagger for 3 people what is the point?
I feel like Steve would be great as a George Lucas-type DM - an ideas and "final verdict" for lore and rules guy, but not the one actually running the show. In a group this big, in a perfect world, split it into 4-6 groups with a few different DMs, Steve outlines a plot or gives some feedback on a plot the DMs write, making sure the lore is consistent. Steve gets to write his lore and world, other people get to actually have fun experiencing it.
Black dragons, while inherently are indeed evil, can be raised successfully too be at least neutral in nature. It just takes proper steps, love, care, and of course successful animal handling checks. I literally watched a story on this. It was amazing!
Intelligence is knowing that Frankenstein is the doctor, not the monster. Wisdom is knowing that the doctor was the monster.
The monster is the son of the doctor in both a literal sense and in his own perception and therefore still Frankenstein.
@@Zetact_ A big part of the story is that the monster won't call himself that unless the doctor recognizes him as such, and he never did. But, that's beside the point. I'm saying the doctor is the monster of the story, not his creation so much.
No I'm pretty sure the 9 foot tall waking corpse that murdered innocent people was the monster. The scientist who made it, passed out, and assumed the whole thing was kinda hallucination was a moron and and asshole, but far from a monster.
@@alexanderchippel He abandoned his child in disgust. He was entirely responsible for what the creature became, and he shirked that. You'll come to realize that. That's what wisdom is.
@@Dark_Jaguar He didn't "abandon his child in disgust" he made an 8ft tall zombie and when he realized he created an abomination he had a panic attack and fainted. When he woke up, it had wandered off.
Yes he was responsible for it but he didn't shirk off the responsibility, he didn't realize that the responsibility actually existed. He thought it was a fever dream because when he woke up it wasn't around.
Intelligence is actually reading the book and comprehending the literal events that are described in the book, and wisdom is understanding the messages. There's two messages. The first one is that you should not tamper with nature recklessly. The second one is that being dealt a bad hand in life is not an excuse to hurt others.
The creature murdered a child. And then purposely framed in innocent woman. He knew doing both of those things were wrong but he did them anyway. Why? Because he's a monster.
I was on the fence on how to feel about Steve. But now I have decided to stand with the OP, Spoonman of the Iron Throne.
Hail the funny spoon man
@@CritCrab I like your words, funny magic man
(JFK, Clone High)
We stand with Spoonman of the Iron Throne
“Spoonman, come together with your hands.
Save me! I’m together with your plans.” -Lord Christopher Cornell of the Garden of Sound.
Reminds me of the story about how a wizard MacGyvered together a hoverchair behind the DMs back after being ignored during a shopping session.
The saddest part is that this could have been a great character interaction and role play moment but because the DM didn't tell them yes or no or say explicitly 'the only way to tell is to let it hatch', it was exclusively an out of character argument.
The DM told the party that the bard knows everything - he gave the bard full control over the lore. The bards word is gospel in regards to black dragons. The druid simply didn't like what the bard decided to go with and thereby didn't respect the DMs response.
@@stammesbruder That wasn’t clarified, though. Most DMs don’t give their players that level of vague control over the lore without interference (either via agreeing or disagreeing), usually only stuff that’s brought up in session 0 and pertains strictly to your character. So it’s not weird to be suspicious that what he was saying wasn’t 1000% true in meta, and if it WAS, the DM should’ve spoken up and said so, like Crit said.
Moreover, this word of his thats supposedly gospel doesn’t make the druids argument invalid. Most races in DND aren’t inherently evil, so even if the bard brings up that argument it makes complete sense that other people (not just the Druid mind you, the whole PARTY was fine with him keeping it) would bring up the counterargument of nothing being inherently evil and nature vs nurture.
@@bluebay1031 there was also the fact that the other character was a druid which are very connected with nature if not nature itself
@@stammesbruder the bard knowing everything doesn't imply he can decide the lore. It means he can ask the DM and get an answer about anything on this topic.
"Do anything, just don't build spoons"
"I've been building spoons the last 8 days"
"How many?"
"I've done nothing but build spoons for 8 days"
@@Mathee “WHERE? WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN BUILDING THEM?!”
@@MatheeThis tournament will go smoothly, as long as no one builds any spoons
@@Oliver-Thyella (a peasant unwittingly opens the door to what they think is a bathroom, only to get smothered in a landslide of wooden spoons.)
I remember how in our OotA game, when we finally convinced DM, that yes, we do get out with OUR dragon egg, the cleric of Bahamut (who was absent in that session) later was rping the turmoil, how "Tiamat is the source of power for chromatic dragons" or something along those line, and my simple-minded barbarian replied with "Well, it's just an egg, can't you ask your god to replace the power source for the egg?" Basically baptising the egg and getting a gold dragon egg in return. (:
Ah, barbarians. Sometimes their simplicity turns out to be brilliance in disguise :)
Steve: Being all around the worst, thinking he got away with punishing the player.
OP: SPOON!!!
"Not in the face! Not in the face!"
(It just felt incomplete.)
Your profile pic is awesome!
@@cubescihist6737 Thanks.
@@robertbryant4669 ah, the tick
OP, Spoon man of the Iron Throne**
I played a dragon blood sorcerer minotaur with a glamor headdress that let him look like a Dragonborn. He had gained access to 3 black dragon eggs and 1 silver dragon egg. The idea that they were evil was brought up. It was simply dealt with by my character saying, "ha! Who cares! Is a fucking dragon! Besides... what's better, being born good or being able to overcome your own nature? I'll raise em right, don't you worry."
👏 👐 simple as
Not gonna lie. "Spoonman of the Iron Throne" is the best thing I've heard all week.
Insert Soundgarden lyrics.
Hail spoonman
Steve: *planned from the beginning that the first part will be a fight to the death*
Also Steve: *makes the characters, including a character with no combat ability*
Also Also Steve: *is surprised when a character HE MADE is ill-suited to what HE PLANNED*
If a craftsman is supposed to participate in a tournament, I would give the benefit of the doubt, that there was something at least somewhat fair planned out - any character could fail in a fight to the death. It's no less of an "all or nothing" situation for every other player.
Nx
RPers are dinguses like that.
Revenge with Spoons is the best revenge.
It’s the only revenge
Just like Spoon-Killer, most cruely slow of all killers... just less violent.
Sadly.
So Steve's railroading effectively forced him to have to repeatedly say "Spoonman of the Iron Throne".
Moral of the story: Don't be like Steve.
"Masterwork items"
THEY'RE MASTERWORKS ALL, YOU CAN'T GO WRONG!
Ah a Fellow Arisen.
Wolves fear fire!
The tail is severed!
Human bones that move on their own!
Strength in numbers, Arisen.
PART 1: ruclips.net/video/u76_YNedVFc/видео.html
Why was OP so nice to the dm?
Because he wanted to be Silverwar-ith him. (Badum-tsh)
LOL!
There's never a bad time for a Monty Python reference!
I DMed a game of dnd and the party found some eggs, and after some rolls, they figured out theyre dragon's eggs. They have 2 options distroy them or keep them. They knew they were black. The characters, not the players. Debated back and forth about their options. They casted a vote they took the eggs. I just gave some info as dm, and characters used player knowledge about dragons and alignment(which was loose) so they have 3 black dragon eggs. 1 went to a shaderkai elf and used a ritual to send it to the raven queen. After the campaign and has reached a decent trustworthy standing with her. Granted him the black dragon, but has been twisted to be a shadow dragon. It was going to be his ultimate prize for collecting the huge amount of objects and knowledge for the queen. Each player at the end came out with some boon or has progressed their characters backstory that they can make new goals or keep going with the ones they have. I have a artificer making a large golem of his own design use materials from everything they collected. The trade off its going to a devil, to complete the bargain they have.
Soooo... Are you planning on putting your episodes on Spotify and stuff like that
So confused why Steve and Carmen didn’t just have an above table conversation about what she wanted for her character. They’re literally married so what’s the excuse there? 🙃
It's almost like someone who wouldn't communicate in the communication based game also wouldn't communicate in his home life..
I feel like she probably did during character creation or in between sessions but Steve just doesn't care.
Honestly to me it sounded a teensy bit like the two of them were indulging in some sort of cuck fantasy
See u thought it was gonna be a humiliation kink thing for Steve ngl
@@Kris-wo4pj But it could also be the other way round. I understand that its an RP, but if your SO isn't comfortable with smth then it isn't cool either. Cause the character that Carmen was playing wasn't just any character, it was a character for her to explore about her sexuality, in front of him. So I could understand Steve being uncomfortable with his wife metaphorically getting it on with other people, in front of him. And cucking him at the end was too much i think. Idk, i just can't imagine myself doing any of those things as either parties. Carmen just seems to not want to be with steve imo, for obvious reasons, cause that just seems like a toxic relationship.
Ran “Tyranny of Dragons” for my group and they had the same argument about the dragon eggs, but it came down to convincing the bard that just because dragons killed his family didn’t mean these dragons deserved to die. He ended up spoiling the little monsters rotten, like chihuahuas.
The DM: "You can not defeat me".
Noble: "No, but he can".
*Enter the Spoonsmith*
I once played a dwarf woodcarver, specifically a toymaker.
I know what my future metalsmith dwarf will be doing during downtime!
Onf Bronze-Spoon will be the best spoonsmith there ever was!
It's spoonmaster of the iron throne, peasant.
He’ll spoon you!
The sponsor reading off like a robot was hilarious. Never change critcrab
I wasn’t sure if it was “robot” or “held at gunpoint”
@@Pablo360able maybe both?
The sad thing is, it even looks good. Looks, anyway.
Sounds AI generated to me, maybe the sponsor pre made the segment and just asked him to include it?
you mean the "Spoonsor"
I thought he was gonna poison the town with cheap drinks but 150 spoons are so much better
I never did/joined a D&D game, only listened to the several stories from RUclips, but i must say the spoonman of the iron throne part has to be one of the best revenge setups i ever heard, pure 10/10.
Shit like this is what makes me keep listening to D&D stories.
You should try it one day, preferably not online, if you try online you will find out the cult of (insert stupid trend here) and that's not cool.
I have many stories, from halfling girl Seiya knocking out an ogre on first strike. To the one time one of my friends destroyed a campaign by pure stupidity, to the one I got a vampire knocked out by a policeman that somehow managed to hit me in a dark night with a huge swarm of insects blocking his shooting so he needed to roll 9s or 10s to hit (no DM screen on this one so we all see that miracle)
Online is... Awful most of time, I think I even met Sierra and Delta.
I recommend some stories
• Puffin Fotest material for laugh
• Tthewritter with "Spoony the Bard"
Tthewritter has very good stories some of them made me drop a tear.
DnD is trash and is best observed from afar like how we would view turd flinging chimps in zoos.
Ahh! Same! I have never played a D&D game either, but I absolutely love listening to stories.
I mean the dude was a bard. The DM could have made up something about an in-universe historical epic poem about a good black dragon. That would have been so cool!
Brian gang, rise up and try not to get into heated debates involving small things, that will ruin the mood for everyone involved!
Brian gang, settle down!
Steve is like the DarkSydePhil of dnd
Oh fuck, what a terrifying concept.
DnD is just war gaming but everyone is either DSP or an Actual clown.
How often do l make jokes about chemistry? Periodically.
Well it seems like the bonding process fell apart
You'll get no reaction from me
is there no solution for our bad puns?
It's just fools gold
I can’t tell if I’m feel repulsion or attraction…
The Spoonman of the Iron Throne thing is incredibly funny and smart. I applause this person.
I imagine now whenever he walks or drives by steve, OP blasts "Spoonman" as loud as his speakers would go
“I would rather be dishonored than dead”
-based maester
One can restore honor, but never restore life -someone probably
Feel like Steve and his wife need to have a chat out of game lol
Definitely. Both were in the wrong here.
Had players arguing over an egg (a hydra this time) in one of my Demon Hunters games. They were much more civilised about it. They talked a bit then agreed to use opposed intimidate rolls. One player now has a hydra sidekick.
That lesbian story and spoonman one was a double feature of funny af
I don't know how dnd works but I can imagine the joy I would feel saying something like
"I would like.. to make a spoon."
That's basically how it works
Sets up stall - pays taxes
Makes money - UHHH we need to tax your entire stall again
ah yes, the 100% income tax. I wonder if he paid his taxes in spoons?
My first thought after reading the title and thumbnail: “player has enough and forces bad DM into unfiltered MRI machine”
That's really smart of op to do the spoon thing. I'm so glad both of my DMS are amazing. Gosh stories like these really make you appreciate what you have.
Depending on setting dragons in 3.5e aren't always set alignments, Eberron being the obvious exception.
There's plenty of times that alignments of more innately ("always") good/evil creatures (dragons, demons, etc) are changed in various campaign modules because of the story as well.
I do love a good spoon-fed revenge tale. Quite a nice treat.
I've wanted to try D&D for a long time. But didn't know where to start, assumed I'd somehow mess up the game for everyone else or just be an intrusion.
I stumbled onto this channel a few months ago and binged the stories (all hail our crab lord etc). That people might actually want new players around was something of a revelation.
Well I turn 40 very soon and I figured... I can't be as bad as some of these guys and finally just got myself an account on Roll20. Worst case, I might have some content offer here. I'm off to find a game 0, thank you for the gentle push xx
If I may ask, how did the search go?
he gets a spoon, she gets a spoon, everyone gets a spoon
This seems to be a rare case bad dnd being better than no dnd because this is just too funny. Hell this is the true dm vs player because it seems like most of the people were just there to spite Steve at one point or another.
I actually saw the development of One more multiverse on tiktok and it's so good to see them expanding and actually sponsoring people.
Spoonman of the iron throne.
That sounds like such a deceptively difficult Bossfight in dark souls.
He throws sharpen spoons like throwing knives, He is chain mail armor made of spoons, and he wields a giant great sword style weapon shaped like a spoon.
And if you get hit by it, you spend a good long three second eternity face down on the ground before you pick yourself back up.
"tis only a spoonful mine lady!"
He has a goblin-built spoon gun that he shoots at you.
One more multiverse looks really cool, ima have to check it out with my friends.
He was so concerned if he could,
he never stopped to think if he crab.
Steve don't crab.
Black Dragon egg scenario reminds me of the Onyxia story a few years back
Yeah exactly!!
literally just finished watching the first video! cant wait to see what the rest has in store
Malicious compliance of the spoons. I love stories like that.
Damn, that 100% tax rate is pretty brutal.
Well, Steve's gotta punish that creativity somehow...
@@BlueTressym They should've responded by starting a political movement to undo the monarchy that instated a 100% tax on certain people in the market.
3.5 is my goto when it comes to D&D, while there is a ton of books to go through the Monster Manual explains the alignments to anyone who cares to read it, which did not seem to be the DM "Steve" or the players arguing it. In the case of "Always" the book states rare exceptions can deviate from the listed alignment. In the worlds I ran the PCs were always rare exceptions and by extension their companions.
Well, now it’s not exception, it’s the norm. Wizards firmly decided to adopt nurture approach. And universal acceptance. You can literally be tentacled monster in Ravenloft and as it is written, no one should react at it with xenophobia. Because people of mists are used to strange things… god, I hate Van Richten guide to Ravenloft…
Not to mention that, in older DnD at least, dragons were basically inherently a specific alignment based on their scale color because of a combination of Bahamut/Tiamat influence and the idea that draconic blood was so powerful that it shaped even the personalities of those who possessed it.
Now I get the idea that raising a chromatic dragon could produce a good variant with proper parenting and hey, that can make for a great story, but the lore establishes the fact they are defaultly evil pretty clearly in 3.5. As in, evil from birth.
4:20 whoa that’s wrong. In 3.5 they did have “usually good” or “usually evil”, ect… it also had “always good.” Or “always evil.”
I'm actually in a Pathfinder 1e campaign right now, which is based off D&D 3.5e, and have chops going back to D&D 3.5 direct. Whether back then or now, no DM/GM I knew ever played it where all creatures had to be Evil. In the old 3.5 days, it was a surprise rarity, but it still was known to happen, with the exception of stuff like Demons and other otherworldly beings where ALL were their stated alignment. Now, we treat it as a "suggestion" rather then a rule, and even otherworldy beings can (VERY rarely) be some alignment other then what they're "supoposed" to be. It's just more fun to do, whether your intent is to keep players on their toes or to have more wiggle room in your story.
So an easy way to sort out the black dragon thing in game would probably have been something like this:
"Black dragons are inherently evil and possess a strong joy for killing living things, they are considered one of if not the most evil of the chromatic dragons.
However there does exist the possibility to change the the dragon's alignment depending on how you raise it, if left to it's own devices they tend toward evil and always will.
All dragons when hatched have an inherent knowledge of what they are and the desires they possess, most dragons are capable from the moment they hatch and will begin to take actions to keep themselves safe as they grow until they reach a large enough size they can defend themselves."
Basically it's possible to raise a chromatic dragon to not be evil but it's usually not worth the effort as if you fail it will probably dispose of you when it can.
I think the problem here was that the alignment debate was not really a character conflict, it was a player conflict about the rules.
When Maple Wallflower the druid and Muschle Massiveson the barbarian debate about the morality of meat consumption it's an interesting RP moment. When druid player and barbarian player argue about wheter it's legal to eat meat according to the rules, it's something that the DM should clarify. You can defend opinions in character that you, the player know that is "wrong" (like not believing that eating meat is illegal, or wanting a good steak even though you know that it is), but when it's more about the players disagreeing on how something works in the world, it's stupid to not say anything.
All hail Spoonman!
Edit: Also, I'm willing to bet that Steve thought he could pull that because he thinks he ACTUALLY did that with Carmen. Since she's bi, even if she hadn't had a significant other that was a woman since they'd met but before they got together, I wouldn't be surprised.
That would maybe mildly excuse the level of 'you just haven't found the right man yet' treatment of a lesbian character, but not the pushing and pursuing a character that is explicitly in a relationship. That's just some major red flags for both the character and Steven himself.
@@rootyful Oh, he's still fully in the wrong. Just calling out where I'm guessing it come from.
while having the characters argue whether a dragon egg is safe or not is definitely a good plot, when your players start arguing out of character, just tell them out of character, especially if one of them "knows all about the egg" if i's safe or not and have them roleplay the rest of the argument if they want
If you have a degree in political science and think that "Poor people aren't trying hard enough", you have effectively spent years studying without understanding a thing.
100% this.
To be fair, that's OP's characterization about a person he clearly doesn't like. I just took it to mean that Pete is a Moderate or Conservative.
If you have a political science degree period you're probably an insufferable person let's be real
Polysci student here and I can agree 💯
@@DSas2300 So, OP is correct. If you, in the year of our lord 2024, are still convinced that Reaganomics is correct, you are a fucking moron.
I like how OP thinks that having different D&D play styles means that Steve and his wife were destined for a divorce. Weeb priorities, there is so much more to life.
OP. Forever alone.
Spoonman, come together with your hands and save me, I'm together with your plan
4:05 The "usually lawful evil" thing started with 3.0, if not in some late-2e product.
DM: "That's a sufficiently hight Nature check for some clarity, what are you trying to figure out here?"
Fixed.
I’d argue that certain monsters are inherently “evil” but I’d read the alignment for the MM as ‘hostility’, but Dragons are incredibly intelligent, and I would rule they aren’t one set alignment
I was helping to run games in a big community Westmarches-style setting once. Gave a party a baby manticore, which of course they named and kept. Community managers went ballistic over "manticores are all evil and that monster isn't allowed in town". Started a civil disobedience insurrection that resulted in a player actually leaving after the guards murdered the baby manticore. Kind of established a tone of "players vs managers" conflict that haunted the rest of the game. Lesson: never fuck with player pets.
On the last story, fruitlessly trying to convert a lesbian is very on-brand for Zap Brannigan, but it doesn't sound like Steve actually understood the joke.
If the DM has an NPC take all your silver as a "tax" because you made some money, it's time to quit right then and there.
"... that they are still married."
Yeah because a few nights of douchery in a game that ultimately means nothing should ruin a marriage.
What people say means a lot whether they mean it or not. They shouldn't divorce over something so silly, but it's interesting that a married couple can fail to play with each other's cues so many times in a row without shaking things up
"It's not necessarily the DM's job to squash every disagreement between party members." - Darn right, I enjoy causing them on occasion. Nothing like dangling a great deal from an enemy - "it's all upside, this makes a lot of sense and we can always turn on him later!" "DID YOU FORGET HE TRIED TO KIDNAP ME A WEEK AGO?" Beautiful, as long as it's in character.
I recently accidnetly tpk'd a party because i made a reference to you it was a 5 health crab that always crits they kept missing it and it eventuly killed them now the druid has it tamed because a npc brought them back and they started throwing it enemies
(they made it tiny plate armor)
Maester sent to represent their house? That aggressively breaks canon
Bro said “ nah imma do own thing.”
*makes spoons.*
Is it bad that I'm hoping he's a bard who made spoons so the old line of "You Spoony Bard!" can fit here in a different context? I don't know 3.5 at all, however, but one can always hope lol
Just because it's evil doesn't mean it can't be USED for good.
when you were partying i was crafting spoons
when you were fighting i was crafting spoons
when you were laughing i was crafiting teaspoons
and now you dare to ask me for salvation?
Small issue I have. Op claims 3.5e just lists the alignment. This is incorrect. Monsters like goblins and orcs have “usually chaotic evil” in their stat block.
While I’m 3.5e black dragons *do* have “always lawful evil” even that isn’t set in stone.
Some creatures even have what percentages of their population are what alignment
Even then, the Draconomicon explains why dragons have high mental stas from the moment they are born and why they gravitate to an alligment: genetic memory.
BUT they can still change with experiences.
So a newborn black dragon will be a megalomaniac lizard, but you can teach them to behave
@@dude8351 exactly! Alignment wasn’t a straight jacket even in 3.5e.
I was looking for someone to mention that. They almost always stated if the monster has to stick to that alignment or not.
@@Grunt10010 Yeah it was like "Hey here's 98% of what this creature is" like the creature got to prove to you that it isn't evil and even then black dragons and green dragons are both fucking social monsters and tricksters so is it really good or is it pulling a scheme.
There's an edge factor that both evil races and evil monsters can have and its awesome.
@@dude8351 so the OP is wrong. Evil can be genetic in DnD.
This would make a great podcast
It's a history check. He can say "You know everything about them" and not answer whether it's possible to raise a black dragon good. You could answer whether it has been done before. My group would eat this shit up because it's the DM's world, not wizards', so we'd all get to see how it all plays out and learn how his world functions.
What some people need to realize like that DM should,
is if you say they know everything about the black dragons
it is their character, not their player that knows.
you still need to make admin decision about what happens and clarify when issues arise.
Going to repeat what I commented on the first story with some added context: "Steve should write his own book but I doubt anyone would suffer through his two billion page epic, *AND* Steve should make his own TTRPG system but I don't think anyone wants to read a 100 page document about character creation alone."
He's clearly someone who wants an audience and thinks he deserves it without putting in any of the effort to get said audience.
I would question why Steve in making a GoT set of characters would think that a Maester would willingly go into a tournament to the death, or be called dishonourable for refusing, but then I remembered he’s an idiot.
I’d also like to know how giving everyone in King's landing a silver spoon ruins the campaign.
I will say this, Zapp Brannigan is hilarious and i could totally see him trying to win over a lesbian...even going just as far as steve took the idea and probably a little further. Zapp would also just be way too thick headed to understand why he wasn't making any progress. Even after the fleet wide communication he would still try to win her over. Let's try and come up with some Zapp pick-up lines that he would try on a lesbian who just got engaged. "2 is ok but 3 is a party", "Why use a cheap plastic toy when you can have the real thing?", "1+1= you and me...+1 more if you'd like to bring your wife along", and i'm sure there are more out there because he's that funny a character. So, what Zapp Brannigan pick-up lines can you people come up with to woo a lesbian?
"You like women? I do too! How about you, your partner, and I return to my chambers and compete to see who likes them better?"
In my mind the way I would see it playing out for Zapp would be either complete, head scratching obliviousness to the concept or thinking it's just a guaranteed shot at a menage a trois.
@@tokiwartooth9935 HA! I like it.
I feel for that last guy, imagine thinking your wife has joined you and your friends for a game and she just wants to explore fantasies that have nothing to do with you. I’m surprised they’re still married considering she very clearly is down bad for ladies and not her husband 😂
Hey, New subscriber here. I got hooked by the Main character throws Tantrum video then checked both Steve saga's material , so naturally I subscribed.
What I find amusing and special of your material is analyzing where it all went wrong and what could've been done about it. I consider it clever advice.
Be aware that some might find it pretensious (because it involves superior knowledge of the theme than the DM or author), but I find it necessary to disect the session bypassing that "moral" or "ethical" dilemma in order to achieve knowledge and improve.
The final issue is that some people might consider toxic to negatively talk bad things about someone else's work. I find it as constructive criticism since you make proposals to improve.
Steve literally not only was playing Zapp Brannigan in character, but also out of character!
The DM could probably have stopped it but at the end of the day, Pete and Mick are adults and are responsible for their own actions.
All hail the Spoonman of the Iron Throne! The weird thing is that Steve’s campaigns individually sound fascinating and fun! I just think they’d need to be in the hands of another DM
I wonder if "inherently evil" is even applicable to animals. Like there are people who keep tigers as pets to sad results. Not sure that keeping dragon is that different. They are not domesticated.
The "you now know everything about Dragons" thing was handled backwards. It should be that the Bard can then ask any question about the Dragon and have it immediately answered by the DM truthfully; the facts of the world are still decided by the DM, it's just that the Bard has instant access to that knowledge.
But here the DM bunked it; he let the Bard just _decide reality by himself_ without the DM's authority. Knowledge is descriptive, not prescriptive. The Bard shouldn't be able to warp reality to what he "thinks should be right", it should be the DM's say that the Bard is just privy to.
I think rolling animal handling on a baby dragon would be like rolling animal handling on a druid in wildshape, just cause it looks animalistic doesn't mean it's got the brain of an animal (I mean a black dragon wyrmling, AKA a newborn has an intelligence of 10 and can speak Draconic).
I watched this not even knowing it was a part 2
The 3.5 rules did say that the black dragons were "always chaotic evil". It contained the "usually" language for Orcs, Goblins and such, but dragons had the "always" language the same as celestials and demons. I could definitely see the argument that it shouldn't have been that way, but the asshole player is technically correct in this instance unless the DM overruled it and said their world differed from the default rules settings.
It in fact does say usually evil or usually good in 3.5. I'm a 3.5 vet with over 10 years player/DM experience and lots of creatures have the "usually" preface for their alignment.
I would of said, its a wild creature and no mater how you train it, eventually, when it becomes and adult, it would also become unpredictable, it could kill you or others in its flustration.
@@grosslittlegoblin1358 Dragons aren't wild animals though, they're basically scaley four legged people who have a pension for breathing on things
My man dropped his resume unprovoked in the comments of a critcrab video
I can't wait for the future where Black Holes could be used as weapons, and these titles would say stuff like, "Guy goes DARK ION (Idk ran out of ideas) on DM!!!"
Sounds like the far future like the Star Trek future
That spoon story! Chef's kiss!
Whenever a DM tells a player rules for some crafting offtime, says something like "but you can only sell it for the marketprice" and the player answers "oh, I can work with that" with a smile; you should definetely know that the campaign is going to be derailed ^^
For monsters like dragons that are intelligent, it's better for them to have a natural predisposition towards certain behaviors based on their scale color, like, say, an instinct to use their breath weapon when angry, or a getting alarmingly angry at specific categories of behavior of those around them that run counter to what their instincts tell them, but be able to restrain themselves from carrying out evil actions if raised in the right environment. Basically, dragons should be treated as someone with potentially explosive anger issues and talked down from evil actions until they learn how to manage themselves.
Spoonman, come together with your hands, save me!
Ahh nothing better then getting off work and having a new Crit Crab AND VLDL D&D episode to listen to.
Come all! The Lord of Crustaceans will tell us a tale of the legendary Spoonman of the Iron Throne!
The weird part about the second one is that he gave him a premade character that can't fight and then said fight to the death vs many other types of people. Unless there is a maester slap fight round with 1 dagger for 3 people what is the point?
I feel like Steve would be great as a George Lucas-type DM - an ideas and "final verdict" for lore and rules guy, but not the one actually running the show. In a group this big, in a perfect world, split it into 4-6 groups with a few different DMs, Steve outlines a plot or gives some feedback on a plot the DMs write, making sure the lore is consistent. Steve gets to write his lore and world, other people get to actually have fun experiencing it.
15:00 in steve defense, thats exactly how zap branigan would act
Black dragons, while inherently are indeed evil, can be raised successfully too be at least neutral in nature. It just takes proper steps, love, care, and of course successful animal handling checks. I literally watched a story on this. It was amazing!
🎵 SPOONMAAAN
MAKE UTENSILS WITH YOUR HANDS
SAVE MEEEE
WORK TO THWART THE DM'S PLAN
SAVE MEEEE🎶
Man, that's an old song now.
Spoonman,
There’s a place we can go
I say Spoonman
Masterwork spoons galore
I say Spoonman
My favorite critical crustacean 🦀