For the Warlock "Fine, your side adventure. Upon escaping the temple with the scholar, the scholar stabs you in the back, offering uo your life in exchange for becoming a warlock in your place. The Great Old One approves, and your soul is devoured to fuel the new pact. Maybe dont trust that Team Evil is one big happy family next time."
DM: "Lol, I'm gonna make a bunch of lesbian NPCs, and they're all going to be offensively horny stereotypes.." OT: (creates a gay character) DM: *"WHAT, HOW DARE YOU"*
People with an "I am in charge therefore I am always right" mindset should not be DMs. But hey, at least we got possibly the funniest of Crispy's bits out of it.
Yeah, I love a good heel turn but if you leave the party you leave the party, you don't get to demand a solo quest. If the GM is down you could write out a "here's what happens next" if you want to rejoin the party later (and didn't burn bridges by murdering other PCs) but that's about it. You want to play you stick with the group
A garbage DM is also a crap player? What a non shock. Seriously, you can see that coming from a few lightyears away. I would self yeeted much sooner than that.
Hey Crispy. I googled the definition of No Pony that the terrible DM said in the last story. No pony means, “Tough shit.” Basically it was the DM’s way of saying Fuck you to OP.
@@nemanjajovanov It’s not common knowledge to me, seeing as I and probably many others had to look it up. In fact, this horror story is the first time I’ve ever heard of the phrase no pony.
@@indagosnake4974 Maybe, but here’s the thing. I live in a southern state and never heard of it in my entire life. Well, not until this horror story, that is.
As a weird side note to the Rome story, yes, vampires *can* charm you silently, it’s one of their abilities *charm* were all the vampire has to do is look at the target to attempt to charm them.
@@atsukana1704 The player wasn't against a new player being introduced, the player was against being forced into a very contrived scenario that relied on the party not just being idiots but also failing multiple saving throws after being idiots.
@@atsukana1704 Railroading does not become better because the DM didn't plan for any other way for a new player to be introduced. And given the arena the new player was introduced in apparently did nothing much for the story then it really makes it clear that the DM could have set this up a lot better.
Crispy, I DMed a dungeon crawl through the woods for my friend to an abandoned castle where on the way I had him meet a zombie he befriended and over the course of the crawl he restored him to his human form and was a Wizard whom my player gave a wand of wonder he found, my player and the wizard npc trekked to an abandoned castle to confront a Lich. Who stole a bunch of magical items from the lord of Neverwinter’s royal mage, he discovered the lich’s soul was kept in a box at the foot of a statue on the far end of the throne room and with two shots, broke the lock to the chest and rolled a nat 20 on the next shot hitting the soul inside killing him, while also fighting off five skeletons and a nightmare with the help of the dopey wizard, who is now the character I’m playing in the dungeon crawl he’s doing for me. Just a wholesome story I thought I’d share.
4:34 there could be a redemption arc similar to how an oath breaker Paladin would be redeemed but if you’re going to do that then you need to discuss it with the dm before hand.
It sounded like he wanted to use a (for this campaign) villain class and lied to convince the DM to allow it. Seemed like the proposal was a redemption arc from the start, not setting it up mid-campaign.
Intro: Catharsis for a player over adultery (or whatever the unmarried equivalent is). Granted it's absolutely not a horror story. 1st story: What's really bad here is the player lying about his character's redemption arc just to play a villain character. Good on DM for handling it well by making him abandon the character. 2nd story: I am convinced I heard this story a long time ago, probably on someone else's channel. Just surprised at hearing it again after so long since this usually happens with newer stories more frequently. I could be mistaken and it's just common for horny DM's to rage about their fetish trap being fooled by characters being different from their players. 3rd story: Nice shenanigan with creative use if an illusion spell. Not even malicious, but with disastrous realistic consequences. Definitely worth laughing about now and retconning later. 4th story: Sounds like a railroad DM who wants to win, maybe even spite the player (unless similar incidents didn't target him). Rather aggravating how the rest of the table didn't call out how an in-game punishment is used for an above-game joke, like they blamed the victim.
In the “changing the way spells etc work” story, after the first time I would have said to the DM: “okay, I’ll let it slide this time, but I want a list of all the rule changes before the next session or I leave
"Well, there are elves around": I thought that meant "the elves are vegetarian, so what can you expect?" The whole thing about eating elves is so nonsensical and baffling.
For bonus points, depending on a particular tribe's interpretation, a wendigo can actually be "a cannibalistic human with a frozen heart". So...maybe the cheating ex's character actually *was* a wendigo the whole time! 0.0 (Note: I'm an 8th Chippewa, one of the Native American tribes from the region in which the wendigo comes from in the first place.)
Yeah, several of the white wolf writers wrote gay characters. Not so much in the WoD, but in Exalted and moreso in Adventure/Abberant/Trinity where it seemed like every important canon npc was LGBT+
That last DM is a narcissist. He can't ever be wrong and will change the rules and warp his own game rather than back down and takes any push back as a personal offense. Like look how far he went over a joke, let alone still hanging onto the charm person thing. No, backtracking to find a better solution that allows him to have his story like having a magic item that let the vampire mind control the Player character. And hypocritical in a way that has one thing consistent: "He's never wrong, and anything implying otherwise isa personal insult that must be addressed.
@13:20 Okay. If it *needs* to happen, just have it happen. Don't give players the illusion of a different option. It kinda sucks to railroad but if it's something that *needs* to happen, like introducing another player to the group, communicate it. It's not too hard to say before the session, "Hey, so, I may need to do a bit of railroading to get the party together so please go along with it." Or something. Once again, kinda sucks, but way better than making players roll for something that you're not going to allow to happen. Kinda reminds me of something that happened in one of my campaigns. A player was getting kidnapped because, reasons. I asked him above the board whether he's struggling or not and said he wasn't going to. So, I had an NPC knock him over the head and it faded to black. While I did give my player a choice, where he could give up or go into combat with bad odds (though, he was a tabaxi bard so he probably could have escaped). Then, I used my DM powers to just make it happen rather than go through the annoying process of having the enemies keep attacking him until he hit 0 hp. Heck, him not fighting back actually put him in a better position where he was then still at full hp, his resources were conserved, and he got to figure out why he was getting kidnapped.
9:20 My party had a moment like this. Our dwarven bard wanted to clear a tavern, so he cast minor illusion to make a dragon sound. Ended up attracting the attention of an actual dragon, who proceeded to start a citywide fire. That moment ended up being pivotal to the rest of the campaign.
That last story feels uncomfortably similar to a campaign I was in for a year and a half. Different events, but same vibe and controlling DM that made arbirtary and caprecious rulings. He even mistaked IC and OoC comments all the time (despite me using a character voice to make everything explicit), assuming I'd made off-color comments that my boyscout of a knight would never say or chiding me for trying to get meta knowledge out of him when my character would think aloud or ask a question of another character.
Vampire's "Charm". The vampire targets one humanoid it can see within 30 feet of it. If the target can see the vampire, the target must succeed on a DC 17 Wisdom saving throw against this magic or be charmed by the vampire. The charmed target regards the vampire as a trusted friend to be heeded and protected. Although the target isn’t under the vampire’s control, it takes the vampire’s requests or actions in the most favorable way it can, and it is a willing target for the vampire’s bite attack. Each time the vampire or the vampire’s companions do anything harmful to the target, it can repeat the saving throw, ending the effect on itself on a success. Otherwise, the effect lasts 24 hours or until the vampire is destroyed, is on a different plane of existence than the target, or takes a bonus action to end the effect.
I actually really like the idea of interferring gods as a concept, and it could make for a hilarious story if done well. Anyone who is familiar with the gods in Terry Pratchetts books will know what i mean. The gods there are basically playing one big RTS game that they dont really care about the outcome so long as they still have some believers left over at the end of each war. Also one god had a penguin as an idol instead of the intended hawk because his chosen prophet was bad at sculpting his idols likeness.
Intro: A bit skirting being problematic, but since the ex left and the character was so perfectly set up that I suppose one can overlook it. Plus, catharsis is always nice. Story 1: NTA. If Warlock chose to oppose the party so blatantly, he's now the enemy. It's unfair to expect the DM to run two adventures at once, as that's a huge diversion of DM time and effort. What Warlock wants is a nice idea, but it's more suited to Westmarches servers and play-by-post online forums than a tabletop game. Story 2: Obviously, the GM can only accept LGBTQ if it matches with his own preferences. Story 3: Yeah, that could have been handled better by both players and DM, but it can happen with new DMs. Final Story: The DM is a complete jackass who wants to run their own story and woe betide anyone who tries to deviate from it. And a hypocrite to boot.
One of the things I like to play is a bard, specifically the bards I play aren't particularly interested in sex, so I'll rarely if ever be rolling to seduce someone, I prefer to play them as a charming, likable, and charismatic person who just likes to have a good time and make other people have a good time along with him.
I've thought of playing a bard who acts like a paladin with chakram techniques and surprises people with his personality clashing with his class and dancer outfit. While he wouldn't be horny, he'd have met horny bards during college.
Me I'm straight as an arrow. Most of my characters are pretty much ace since I am not much for romance in my games. The only character I made that did have a sexual preference was a bi changeling since I wanted to explore out my comfort zone a bit.
As an Dm whose Ancient Rome homebrew is nearing the end...that story pissed me off. Railroading, using nothing of the historical setting to tell a combined story... I wish OP was in my campaign, they would've had a better time.
The last story reminds me of when I played with my parents group. I was a Paladin (2e rules) and we had all awoken with amnesia so we didn't know anything other than our races. We were all chained to pillars in the basement of the wall and a vampire apporached us. My character recieved a message in my head that I had to kill this creature. Turned out my character hired all of my parent's group to raid a vampire den, kill them all, and that should have been the end of it. However, this one shot was boring as hell. After killing 10+ vampires, killing zombies, and going through 5 floors below the surface of a church, I asked my God, "Are we close to the head vampire?" He told me "no", and so I muttered "God dammit" because this was taking forever. However, the DM heard me, and as a punishment for saying that phrase, I LOST MY HOLY AVENGER AND ARMOR! I told him that I wasn't saying this in character, and that everyone was making comments like that, but he wouldn't listen. So now we had no way of finding the head vampire (my weapon was leading the way) so eventually when we got to the second to last floor, I sacrificed my character. He had no spells left (most of my spells were tied to the sword and Paladins in 2e only have 2 at level 10), no weapon, and no armor. The DM was not happy and told me that if I applogized for my comment than I might get my sword back. I said ,"No, I'm good" and then proceeded to be cannon fodder. The rest of the group killed tbe vampire, I was revive and I still refused to apologize. I played with my parents group for another few years, but i eventually left that group due to my own personal reasons. TLDR: said something out of character, was punished, and decided to have my character sacrifice himself because he was stripped of being able to do anything.
My paladin got charmed in a session a few weeks ago. And honestly, I felt that it would have been completely correct that if any of my party looked like they were going to attack him, she would have absolutely tried to stop it, including attacking her friends. That's just how she roles. She probably would not have started attacking her party if they made no moves towards the vamp...but if they looked like they were going to, she was absolutely the kind of person who would put someone down for threatening to kill a friend let alone if they managed to actually land a hit. Luckily she shook off the charm before that became an issue, but I was totally ready to act before that point. It would have sucked, but that's just how things would have played out.
Second story violates what I consider the Prime Directive of TTRPGs: NEVER screw over the party. Yeah, your character might side with the bad guy, but doing so screws over the party by acting against their collective interest. It irks me to no end that people will write characters that will be sticks in the mud and ruin the other party members' plans, then act amazed when people get upset over that. Pulling pranks and having differences of opinion is one thing, but choosing to do something that can actively derail the story or put other PCs in danger is a fast way of having others not want to work with you and no, the DM should not be held responsible for "working it out."
I’m sorry, but hearing the line “You can’t play Curse of Strahd without going to Barovia” made me think “Wait, that happens?” I know a guy who had a DM that was against combat and kept trying to run Curse of Strahd. All three times ended in failure cuz, y’know, it’s Strahd. But players never actually going to Barovia? I remember the Fallout story ending badly because they players didn’t want to leave their setting’s Vault and got mad at the DM when the Enclave burst in with over 100 bullets a minute firing everywhere.
For the explosion one, I’d just be like “your party is arrested and executed for terrorism. GAME OVER.” and then reset back to the beginning of the scene
Intro: Karma the Alligator bit him HARD! First Story: Yeah, this is not a Single Player campaign. I am guessing this is not this player's first rodeo so should have known better. This is a cooperative story, and doing something that scrws the group over is bad. I have been on the receiving end of F'ing around and I found out, but i did learn from it. This guy dosn't sound like he did. Second Story: I am Mormon and this DM makes me feel like look like the Uber Ally by comparison. OP wasn't doing this as an over the top stereotype, and was just playing them as someone that just happens like guys (getting kicked out of the family for it) great. EVEN without the GM aways playing hyper virulent and hyper horny lesbians, I call bull. Also I like mythology alot and its either having a historical documentary on will make me a happy boy, so I can say alot of stuff in this campaign should have at least put everyone sliding on a bi (given how the Greeks, Romans, several middle Easter civilizations, and anyone one else that used something like a demigod usually swung). Third Story: How is this not a common Knowledge thing: When the DM says "Are you sure?" That is the same as when a Mom says that, or an Irate Girlfriend. That means, not are you sure that was a good idea, but MOM speak for: This is a dumb idea, with terrible consequences for you if you choose to keep doing this. Do you want to keep doing this foolishness or do the smart thing? Fourth Story: Time for some Bible Thumping: Judge Not Lest Ye be Judged Yourself. It means not to judge (we have to do that with pearls and swine, or what is holy unto dogs) but it means the standard you put others under you better follow yourself as you are under the same standard.
In regards to the timer thing. Our dm had a one minute timer that he will bring out only after a player has sat inactive in combat for a prolonged period of timeit gets really wild because if a move still hasn't been made its counted as a full round for everyone
Story 2: so... I guess I should never play any race other than human since I'm a human... and that rules out basically every class I can play since I can't do magic and am not trained with weapons irl.
"You can't solve all your problems with swords" Sword enthusiasts fencers: Are you about that? Also, the last story got me thinking; if a player were forced to do aside comments every time they told a hoke, it made me imagine a D&D character based on Foghorn Leghorn "I slay, I say I SLAY!"
Okay, to be fair, the Vampires „Charm“ ability is phrased VERY differently than „Charm Person“ and so using the argument of „if charm person can’t do it the charm ability of the vampire can’t do it either“ dosen’t really work. The charm effect of the vampire really is a lot closer to a dominante spell than a charm person. However, I also don’t think the charmed pc would immediately try to nuke their friends, perhaps first try using some of their lower level or control spells, but if the vampire keeps the charm up long enough and begins to convince the pc that they are only protecting themselves (perhaps pull a move akin to Palpatine in RotS) the pc would use more lethal force. As for the elf thing, idk this seems like a petty thing where either side could’ve backed down but after the charm incident/argument either side was too proud to get up of their high horse and probably should’ve either aired out their issues earlier or just not play with each other.
There was this moment in a campaign I was running when the party was supposed to be abused, but the first attack roll I made was a 1, so the ambusher fell from their tree. In the end, the party still got to the next story beat, but just in a VERY different way than I had planned lmao
*Looks sadly at table* Well, there are elves here. Everyone in the room where there are indeed elves: "uh yeah? there are" and that should've been the end of it
That story with the warlock... sometimes what's right for the character is to let them go. Let them become an enemy if that's what feels right, or leave for whatever reason is fitting for them. It could have been an epic ending for that character. What's right for your character does not always mean the rest of the group is obligated to go along with it. Ultimately this game is about being part of a team. If your character does not fit in with the team, you need to either make a character who does, or maybe it's not the game for you. I actually thought that could've been a really cool exit for that warlock character.
From what I hear, if the warlock stuck to his character going to the dark side and either let him become an NPC or just go onto the sunset, no one would object to that, considering he was asked that he may need to get a new character to go on playing. Rather it's the backpedalling what was supposed to be a redemption arc and then demanding a concurrent evil arc focusing on just you. The warlock seems more like a spotlight hog who spotted his chance than someone who wanted to play along.
Railroading asshole DM... geez. But it does make a comparison to how the Gods work in my DMing. Like sometimes yeah they will take offense to a joke, they won't go for LITERAL TORTURE! but they will like, throw a lightning bolt at you. It doesn't happen often like lightning bolts just raining out of the blue everywhere but it's an occurrence that if someone is hit by lightning it is an in world joke to say "oh, guess the gods hate you." And if it happens then it's a CON save, if you succeed it is half damage. And then an Insight check to see if you realize which god you may have offended. And the Damage depends on the severity of the offense. Like a moderately rude joke could be 3d6. but like the ULTIMATE BLASPHEMY! could be like 6d8 so there's indicators to what you did and why it happened. It's you know... FAIR.
Story 3: Seems like an easy fix to me. The whole weight of local authority comes down on the player's heads, impressing upon them just how fucked they are, then some slimy authority figure offers them an out to go do some morally questionable job for them in exchange for sweeping the whole circus incident under the carpet. They go off for the job, maybe they do morally questionable thing, maybe they decide not to; either way, slimy person and some goons show up at the worst possible time to sweep _them_ under the carpet too. Just a rough idea that occurred to me in five minutes. I'm sure it could be refined into something better.
God Punishes Player For Joke: You know I would be interested in hearing the nonfriend players thoughts on the OP. Yeah the GM was railroading and kept doubling down/twisting rules. But by the accounting the OP decided to.... dig in heels and double down even more when conflict arose and made it public during session? Derailing the enjoyment for everyone while he butts heads with the DM. I feel we are only seeing cherry picked behavior here and our OP boyo was no less horrible on the DM. O ❤therwise the other players wouldn't have been so quick to team up to jump down his throat. 'Everyone's TA here. And honestly I use this lightly in the DM's case and maybe other players's case because his 'crime' seems to be.... being a railroad DM and not knowing how to handle an aggressive rules lawyer in a calm frame of mind? A 'bad' gm maybe. But he can grow. I mean I dunno. We only have salty rage quit OP's glasses painted to give him the best light to look through to this scene. Aesop's Corner: Extreme railroading is bad, DMs. Strongly establish what you have adjusted via spells and rules, and the stick to them. Especially for homebrew. If there are parts of the story you REALLY want to have happen in a certain way, discuss them now or before that session and see if you can work with the players to find a compromise. I personally do recommend a more fluid style but hey. Also try to think a bit outside the box when it comes to spicing up a similar encounter that seemed too easy. Instead of twisting a spell to do something completely new and not established as changed, maybe.... this DM could have worked a small side encounter with a TOTALLY NEW magic item.... say a necklace or such that the vampire had managed to slip on the player that went turncoat. Granted she probably went heavy handed with the Moonbeam spell but can't lie that is generally my first go to spell of a dangerous encounter (to the point the gang i usually play with made me a special token for it) so uuuuh. Ahem c.c Players. There is a time and place to be firm about your concerns with the campaign. It is not. I repeat NOT in the middle of the session, stopping the session so you can go on a crusade about how this is absolute bullshit logic. And yes. Even if the DM is being an asshole. A good wait of approaching the first example? Bringing up the character's background allowing for knowledge and using an identify spell? Fair to ask. But even if the DM answers that he twisted the way the spell works in the most annoying way possible for his world, try to keep the tone along the lines of 'Okay then don't mind pedalling back, please tell us how the spell differs from the book?' And saving the constructive crits for AFTER SESSION or any requests for cementing spell changes so it doesn't completely stop the game while you play Unstoppable Force vs Immovable Object. Ultimately if the DM is still playing or acting in a way you don't see as a fit you should politely leave the campaign. Too many times I see people saying it is an asshole thing to do or they don't like confrontation or a number of other reasons they wouldn't admit to (stubborn pride for this OP maybe). But there are far more rude things. And you should first and foremost remember that fun is fun. Not everyone has the same style or taste in fun. Try not to let yourself fall for the trap of 'social contract means you need to put up with terrible things'.
I think Warlock betraying the party isn’t a huge problem story wise, if it works into his backstory they covered with the DM the totally fine. Their reluctance to roll a new character and hunt down their old character is the issue.
According to the story, that Warlock was supposed to regret his Pact and seek redemption, so joining the evil scholar makes no sense for what the player told the DM. Like a lawful good paladin doing evil.
@@ArcCaravan Yes but a pact isn’t broken just because you regret it. I said before it wouldn’t be a huge issue story wise because as a DM I could think of a few reason to make it work, assuming the player agreed (but I don’t think this one would). I played a character with a similar backstory, a hag gave him his powers but I’m the pact be basically became a walking camera and he’d have to act on her interest in the world.
@@ggrowwarrior Based on the post this wasn't the Warlock being controlled by his patron (which would be the DM's choice or at least require approval beforehand), the player just made his warlock act out of character to join a villain of his own will.
@@ArcCaravan It sounded like the DM accepted the pivot in the players action even though it went against what they said and was completely unexpected. DM didn’t kick player or retcon the betray, they just asked that the player roll a new character to continue playing. The player reluctance to play something different and their insistence on having an entire side campaign was the issue. The DM even asked were they the AH for making the player roll a new character.
@@ggrowwarrior Almost everyone I've heard ask AITA were obviously not and just self-conscious. The fact the player lied about his character's intended story and expected everything to work out for him irks me a lot. Changing character sounds like punishment, at least in this instance. And retcons are generally a last resort, probably only an option if the player refused to leave or change characters.
That skit was great! I'd love to see how this could be done, even if the idea downright idiotic as a narrative. Frustrating Game story: I know a lot of horror stories occur because people are being doormats, but this DM is just inane.
Why are some DMs so picky about their players making characters exactly like them? I noticed the first DM I played with (then boyfriend, now ex) seemed to not like people making characters that weren't the same gender as them, or at the very least when I did so. My first character was a good aligned female that had a romance with an NPC I liked, but in another zombie themed campaign I made a neutral evil scientist and had a chaotic good teenage boy as my backup (I'm a girl, of course, and neither of those characters had much interest in romance given their personalities and the setting). He actively attempted to kill the scientist, and told me an NPC in the party would've just shot the backup character for being "a mouthy teenager" when he would've had multiple reasons to be wary of the party but still opt to stick with them purely for survival and potentially bond later because he needed a trusted adult figure in his life for support and guidance. I got the distinct impression what he _wanted_ was for me to make a sexy Ada Wong type character that he could romance, as when I was throwing out ideas I mentioned making a female police officer or maybe a government agent of some kind, which he seemed interested in, and less so when I also suggested a male scientist who was flirty with everyone but notably leaning towards gay (just without the stereotypes, he wasn't going to act flirty because he was gay but simply because that was just his personality, in a more lighthearted and playful way rather than genuine attempts at affection/romance) and thus wouldn't really end up with a romance in the campaign as a couple of other PCs were teens (hence the backup character concept) and the majority of adult characters were NPCs the DM was playing. Guess he just wanted his gf in the game so he could romance the character, but only if it was a female character because he couldnt stand the thought of a gay/lesbian romance or _gasp_ *no romance???* I don't really know my own sexuality/romantic preferences to be honest (though demi/ace seems pretty likely), but I tend to make characters who don't have specific preferences so that I can ship them with whoever I want. Or at the very least, their romantic preferences aren't important to me until I can see them paired with a particular character, at which point I'll decide if they're into men/women/both/etc. I have tons of OCs who are in non-hetero relationships, unlike when I was a teenager where that was basically all of the relationships I'd create
"Make up a side story for me alone on the spot" is a wild reaction to clear consequences for actions.. however "the ancient God rewards your efforts with death" and tada he has his side story, it's tied up and we can move on with or without him.
Personally, for Story 1, I think having your character betray the party and run off to join the villain is a fun idea. Like, I'd talk to the GM about it first, and I wouldn't expect to keep playing them, though I think doing a sort of informal one on one session with the GM to cover what the character does while with the BBEG (at least initially) isn't unreasonable.
Last story: Pretty obvious what the problem was there. DM had a fragile ego. They couldn't stand being wrong about anything and they were completely incapable to reverse course once they started on something. They were probably already salty at narrator for questioning them earlier, overreacted to something narrator did and completely invested their pride in being "right".
Lol the joke story is nice if a bit wacky villain origin story. How my character's mission became finding the way to murder this God and genocide his entire faith 😂 I am so sorry... that i burned your temple and salted the earth around the ruins😂
Hold on... if the gods cared that much... where was the goliath paladin's god? Shouldn't a rival god attacking another god's paladin result in god od god action?
For the Warlock "Fine, your side adventure. Upon escaping the temple with the scholar, the scholar stabs you in the back, offering uo your life in exchange for becoming a warlock in your place. The Great Old One approves, and your soul is devoured to fuel the new pact. Maybe dont trust that Team Evil is one big happy family next time."
DM: "Lol, I'm gonna make a bunch of lesbian NPCs, and they're all going to be offensively horny stereotypes.."
OT: (creates a gay character)
DM: *"WHAT, HOW DARE YOU"*
When did DM wish for gay PCs? He just used fetishized lesbian PCs with no justification.
@@ArcCaravan Fixed it
"HE DRANK WITH YOU ON THREE OF YOUR WEDDING DAYS!"
Holy hell, that line killed me 🤣
"Don'taskmehowIknowthat" I'm dying 😂
"Strange hill to die on, but at least you're dead!"
If the gods are so omnipresent to be joke police. Can't they Sense motive with like a +23 modifier?
People with an "I am in charge therefore I am always right" mindset should not be DMs. But hey, at least we got possibly the funniest of Crispy's bits out of it.
Story 1 - NTA
When your PC breaks off from the party, then they must do so knowing that character is now a NPC.
This is Main Character syndrome.
Especially if it's by turning evil despite telling the DM they're supposed to be on a redemption journey.
Yeah, I love a good heel turn but if you leave the party you leave the party, you don't get to demand a solo quest. If the GM is down you could write out a "here's what happens next" if you want to rejoin the party later (and didn't burn bridges by murdering other PCs) but that's about it. You want to play you stick with the group
A garbage DM is also a crap player? What a non shock.
Seriously, you can see that coming from a few lightyears away. I would self yeeted much sooner than that.
Hey Crispy. I googled the definition of No Pony that the terrible DM said in the last story. No pony means, “Tough shit.” Basically it was the DM’s way of saying Fuck you to OP.
Wait, are you serious? I thought that was common knowledge, even for non-native speakers.
@@nemanjajovanov It’s not common knowledge to me, seeing as I and probably many others had to look it up. In fact, this horror story is the first time I’ve ever heard of the phrase no pony.
It might be a southern saying or something.
@@indagosnake4974 Maybe, but here’s the thing. I live in a southern state and never heard of it in my entire life. Well, not until this horror story, that is.
@@bryantspears119 Fair enough, I’m from Missouri and haven’t heard of it either.
As a weird side note to the Rome story, yes, vampires *can* charm you silently, it’s one of their abilities *charm* were all the vampire has to do is look at the target to attempt to charm them.
D&D ran a Sharingan.
"Your love is weird!" 😂 Nice community reference.
I love these little skits between the Crispy Clones.
If you’re *that* bent out over a joke…then you really have no right to be a DM of *any* game 😑
@@atsukana1704 The player wasn't against a new player being introduced, the player was against being forced into a very contrived scenario that relied on the party not just being idiots but also failing multiple saving throws after being idiots.
@@atsukana1704It was more about how they reached the player introduction, being railroaded into an obvious trap.
I wouldn't be surprised if the DM wanted to pick on OP for calling out his garbage before and resisting his whims.
@@atsukana1704 Railroading does not become better because the DM didn't plan for any other way for a new player to be introduced. And given the arena the new player was introduced in apparently did nothing much for the story then it really makes it clear that the DM could have set this up a lot better.
Yeah and get a sense of humor implant while he's at it
"HE DRANK WITH YOU ON 3 OF YOUR WEDDING DAYS...don't ask me how I know that." 😂
Your side skits are killer. My sides hurt from laughing.
Last DM got so uppity about a simple joke that they decided to prometheus a player’s character…
Wouldn't surprise me if the DM targeted OP for previous disagreements.
Crispy, I DMed a dungeon crawl through the woods for my friend to an abandoned castle where on the way I had him meet a zombie he befriended and over the course of the crawl he restored him to his human form and was a Wizard whom my player gave a wand of wonder he found, my player and the wizard npc trekked to an abandoned castle to confront a Lich. Who stole a bunch of magical items from the lord of Neverwinter’s royal mage, he discovered the lich’s soul was kept in a box at the foot of a statue on the far end of the throne room and with two shots, broke the lock to the chest and rolled a nat 20 on the next shot hitting the soul inside killing him, while also fighting off five skeletons and a nightmare with the help of the dopey wizard, who is now the character I’m playing in the dungeon crawl he’s doing for me. Just a wholesome story I thought I’d share.
I genuinely love this, sounds so damn wholesome and fun
Dmnpc's when done right.
Well done.
This is so wholesome and cute.
That Wedding Day bit killed me
Crispy's skit was so freaking funny.
I like the villain being appalled like the paladin wasn't his enemy and knew the traitor was married 3 times.
@@ArcCaravan When you out villain the villain, you know you screwed up. I'm still chucking from even thinking of his facial reaction as the villain.
@@BlindZubat Or the villain failed compared to whoever out villained them.
@@ArcCaravan lol fair point.
4:34 there could be a redemption arc similar to how an oath breaker Paladin would be redeemed but if you’re going to do that then you need to discuss it with the dm before hand.
It sounded like he wanted to use a (for this campaign) villain class and lied to convince the DM to allow it. Seemed like the proposal was a redemption arc from the start, not setting it up mid-campaign.
I like to think of the mindset of the last DM as "Trunchbull Syndrome". I'm right, you're wrong! I'm big, you're little!
Intro: Catharsis for a player over adultery (or whatever the unmarried equivalent is). Granted it's absolutely not a horror story.
1st story: What's really bad here is the player lying about his character's redemption arc just to play a villain character. Good on DM for handling it well by making him abandon the character.
2nd story: I am convinced I heard this story a long time ago, probably on someone else's channel. Just surprised at hearing it again after so long since this usually happens with newer stories more frequently. I could be mistaken and it's just common for horny DM's to rage about their fetish trap being fooled by characters being different from their players.
3rd story: Nice shenanigan with creative use if an illusion spell. Not even malicious, but with disastrous realistic consequences. Definitely worth laughing about now and retconning later.
4th story: Sounds like a railroad DM who wants to win, maybe even spite the player (unless similar incidents didn't target him). Rather aggravating how the rest of the table didn't call out how an in-game punishment is used for an above-game joke, like they blamed the victim.
In the “changing the way spells etc work” story, after the first time I would have said to the DM: “okay, I’ll let it slide this time, but I want a list of all the rule changes before the next session or I leave
"Well, there are elves around": I thought that meant "the elves are vegetarian, so what can you expect?" The whole thing about eating elves is so nonsensical and baffling.
Such a nice dm for allowing op to do that to her cheating ex character. What a bro 😁
For bonus points, depending on a particular tribe's interpretation, a wendigo can actually be "a cannibalistic human with a frozen heart". So...maybe the cheating ex's character actually *was* a wendigo the whole time! 0.0 (Note: I'm an 8th Chippewa, one of the Native American tribes from the region in which the wendigo comes from in the first place.)
"You cant solve your problems with swords" thanks for telling me that AFTER I already have...
“Yo, m’y characters is evil now, make me a side adventure.
- Nope.
- Why? It’s so interesting!
- Ain’t nobody got time.”
Exalted sourcebooks are actually pretty good at having LGBTQ+ representation among their NPCs.
I doubt the DM would use those NPCs unless they were lesbians to fetishize.
Yeah, several of the white wolf writers wrote gay characters. Not so much in the WoD, but in Exalted and moreso in Adventure/Abberant/Trinity where it seemed like every important canon npc was LGBT+
That intro story was hilarious 😂😂😂
That last DM is a narcissist. He can't ever be wrong and will change the rules and warp his own game rather than back down and takes any push back as a personal offense. Like look how far he went over a joke, let alone still hanging onto the charm person thing. No, backtracking to find a better solution that allows him to have his story like having a magic item that let the vampire mind control the Player character. And hypocritical in a way that has one thing consistent: "He's never wrong, and anything implying otherwise isa personal insult that must be addressed.
@13:20
Okay. If it *needs* to happen, just have it happen. Don't give players the illusion of a different option. It kinda sucks to railroad but if it's something that *needs* to happen, like introducing another player to the group, communicate it. It's not too hard to say before the session, "Hey, so, I may need to do a bit of railroading to get the party together so please go along with it." Or something. Once again, kinda sucks, but way better than making players roll for something that you're not going to allow to happen.
Kinda reminds me of something that happened in one of my campaigns. A player was getting kidnapped because, reasons. I asked him above the board whether he's struggling or not and said he wasn't going to. So, I had an NPC knock him over the head and it faded to black. While I did give my player a choice, where he could give up or go into combat with bad odds (though, he was a tabaxi bard so he probably could have escaped). Then, I used my DM powers to just make it happen rather than go through the annoying process of having the enemies keep attacking him until he hit 0 hp. Heck, him not fighting back actually put him in a better position where he was then still at full hp, his resources were conserved, and he got to figure out why he was getting kidnapped.
9:20
My party had a moment like this. Our dwarven bard wanted to clear a tavern, so he cast minor illusion to make a dragon sound. Ended up attracting the attention of an actual dragon, who proceeded to start a citywide fire. That moment ended up being pivotal to the rest of the campaign.
That Community reference during the skit was top tier, 10/10.
That last story feels uncomfortably similar to a campaign I was in for a year and a half. Different events, but same vibe and controlling DM that made arbirtary and caprecious rulings. He even mistaked IC and OoC comments all the time (despite me using a character voice to make everything explicit), assuming I'd made off-color comments that my boyscout of a knight would never say or chiding me for trying to get meta knowledge out of him when my character would think aloud or ask a question of another character.
Vampire's "Charm". The vampire targets one humanoid it can see within 30 feet of it. If the target can see the vampire, the target must succeed on a DC 17 Wisdom saving throw against this magic or be charmed by the vampire. The charmed target regards the vampire as a trusted friend to be heeded and protected. Although the target isn’t under the vampire’s control, it takes the vampire’s requests or actions in the most favorable way it can, and it is a willing target for the vampire’s bite attack.
Each time the vampire or the vampire’s companions do anything harmful to the target, it can repeat the saving throw, ending the effect on itself on a success. Otherwise, the effect lasts 24 hours or until the vampire is destroyed, is on a different plane of existence than the target, or takes a bonus action to end the effect.
I actually really like the idea of interferring gods as a concept, and it could make for a hilarious story if done well. Anyone who is familiar with the gods in Terry Pratchetts books will know what i mean. The gods there are basically playing one big RTS game that they dont really care about the outcome so long as they still have some believers left over at the end of each war. Also one god had a penguin as an idol instead of the intended hawk because his chosen prophet was bad at sculpting his idols likeness.
Intro: A bit skirting being problematic, but since the ex left and the character was so perfectly set up that I suppose one can overlook it. Plus, catharsis is always nice.
Story 1: NTA. If Warlock chose to oppose the party so blatantly, he's now the enemy. It's unfair to expect the DM to run two adventures at once, as that's a huge diversion of DM time and effort. What Warlock wants is a nice idea, but it's more suited to Westmarches servers and play-by-post online forums than a tabletop game.
Story 2: Obviously, the GM can only accept LGBTQ if it matches with his own preferences.
Story 3: Yeah, that could have been handled better by both players and DM, but it can happen with new DMs.
Final Story: The DM is a complete jackass who wants to run their own story and woe betide anyone who tries to deviate from it. And a hypocrite to boot.
Monsters: *Eat the elves*
The Elder God: *Sleeps*
A Paladin: *Makes a Joke*
The Elder God: REAL SHIT!
One of the things I like to play is a bard, specifically the bards I play aren't particularly interested in sex, so I'll rarely if ever be rolling to seduce someone, I prefer to play them as a charming, likable, and charismatic person who just likes to have a good time and make other people have a good time along with him.
I've thought of playing a bard who acts like a paladin with chakram techniques and surprises people with his personality clashing with his class and dancer outfit. While he wouldn't be horny, he'd have met horny bards during college.
Me I'm straight as an arrow. Most of my characters are pretty much ace since I am not much for romance in my games. The only character I made that did have a sexual preference was a bi changeling since I wanted to explore out my comfort zone a bit.
The weirdest railroad. 👍
As an Dm whose Ancient Rome homebrew is nearing the end...that story pissed me off. Railroading, using nothing of the historical setting to tell a combined story...
I wish OP was in my campaign, they would've had a better time.
The last story reminds me of when I played with my parents group. I was a Paladin (2e rules) and we had all awoken with amnesia so we didn't know anything other than our races. We were all chained to pillars in the basement of the wall and a vampire apporached us. My character recieved a message in my head that I had to kill this creature.
Turned out my character hired all of my parent's group to raid a vampire den, kill them all, and that should have been the end of it. However, this one shot was boring as hell. After killing 10+ vampires, killing zombies, and going through 5 floors below the surface of a church, I asked my God, "Are we close to the head vampire?" He told me "no", and so I muttered "God dammit" because this was taking forever.
However, the DM heard me, and as a punishment for saying that phrase, I LOST MY HOLY AVENGER AND ARMOR! I told him that I wasn't saying this in character, and that everyone was making comments like that, but he wouldn't listen. So now we had no way of finding the head vampire (my weapon was leading the way) so eventually when we got to the second to last floor, I sacrificed my character. He had no spells left (most of my spells were tied to the sword and Paladins in 2e only have 2 at level 10), no weapon, and no armor. The DM was not happy and told me that if I applogized for my comment than I might get my sword back. I said ,"No, I'm good" and then proceeded to be cannon fodder. The rest of the group killed tbe vampire, I was revive and I still refused to apologize.
I played with my parents group for another few years, but i eventually left that group due to my own personal reasons.
TLDR: said something out of character, was punished, and decided to have my character sacrifice himself because he was stripped of being able to do anything.
My paladin got charmed in a session a few weeks ago. And honestly, I felt that it would have been completely correct that if any of my party looked like they were going to attack him, she would have absolutely tried to stop it, including attacking her friends. That's just how she roles. She probably would not have started attacking her party if they made no moves towards the vamp...but if they looked like they were going to, she was absolutely the kind of person who would put someone down for threatening to kill a friend let alone if they managed to actually land a hit.
Luckily she shook off the charm before that became an issue, but I was totally ready to act before that point. It would have sucked, but that's just how things would have played out.
Second story violates what I consider the Prime Directive of TTRPGs: NEVER screw over the party. Yeah, your character might side with the bad guy, but doing so screws over the party by acting against their collective interest. It irks me to no end that people will write characters that will be sticks in the mud and ruin the other party members' plans, then act amazed when people get upset over that. Pulling pranks and having differences of opinion is one thing, but choosing to do something that can actively derail the story or put other PCs in danger is a fast way of having others not want to work with you and no, the DM should not be held responsible for "working it out."
The weirdest railroad. 🤦🏻♀️
"Can we still be friends?😊"
"NO!😱"
I’m sorry, but hearing the line “You can’t play Curse of Strahd without going to Barovia” made me think “Wait, that happens?”
I know a guy who had a DM that was against combat and kept trying to run Curse of Strahd. All three times ended in failure cuz, y’know, it’s Strahd.
But players never actually going to Barovia? I remember the Fallout story ending badly because they players didn’t want to leave their setting’s Vault and got mad at the DM when the Enclave burst in with over 100 bullets a minute firing everywhere.
"YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO LOVE EACH OTHER" wait a second I know that phrase. "YOUR LOVE IS WEEIIRD" TOOOOOOOODD
For the explosion one, I’d just be like “your party is arrested and executed for terrorism. GAME OVER.” and then reset back to the beginning of the scene
18:08 -18:58 When the villain has ethical and/or moral standards.
Intro: Karma the Alligator bit him HARD!
First Story: Yeah, this is not a Single Player campaign. I am guessing this is not this player's first rodeo so should have known better. This is a cooperative story, and doing something that scrws the group over is bad. I have been on the receiving end of F'ing around and I found out, but i did learn from it. This guy dosn't sound like he did.
Second Story: I am Mormon and this DM makes me feel like look like the Uber Ally by comparison. OP wasn't doing this as an over the top stereotype, and was just playing them as someone that just happens like guys (getting kicked out of the family for it) great. EVEN without the GM aways playing hyper virulent and hyper horny lesbians, I call bull. Also I like mythology alot and its either having a historical documentary on will make me a happy boy, so I can say alot of stuff in this campaign should have at least put everyone sliding on a bi (given how the Greeks, Romans, several middle Easter civilizations, and anyone one else that used something like a demigod usually swung).
Third Story: How is this not a common Knowledge thing: When the DM says "Are you sure?" That is the same as when a Mom says that, or an Irate Girlfriend. That means, not are you sure that was a good idea, but MOM speak for: This is a dumb idea, with terrible consequences for you if you choose to keep doing this. Do you want to keep doing this foolishness or do the smart thing?
Fourth Story: Time for some Bible Thumping: Judge Not Lest Ye be Judged Yourself. It means not to judge (we have to do that with pearls and swine, or what is holy unto dogs) but it means the standard you put others under you better follow yourself as you are under the same standard.
That skit was amazing! The perfectly cut scream at the end!
Bro that intro was so breathy i thought we were about to witness something😂😂😂
Hi Crispy! I love your skits--their hilarious! 🤣
In regards to the timer thing. Our dm had a one minute timer that he will bring out only after a player has sat inactive in combat for a prolonged period of timeit gets really wild because if a move still hasn't been made its counted as a full round for everyone
❤❤❤ Love your content Crispy!!
Story 2: so... I guess I should never play any race other than human since I'm a human... and that rules out basically every class I can play since I can't do magic and am not trained with weapons irl.
I do the “god smites you” thing as a bit but damn
We are the Hanky panky Sentai: Succubranger!
Loved the video!
"You can't solve all your problems with swords"
Sword enthusiasts fencers: Are you about that?
Also, the last story got me thinking; if a player were forced to do aside comments every time they told a hoke, it made me imagine a D&D character based on Foghorn Leghorn
"I slay, I say I SLAY!"
That dm sounds like if J. J. Abrams was a DM. Just making it so whatever he wants to happen happens without earning it
Geez those high notes. RIP me and my headphones.
The weirdest railroad… why did my autocorrect try to separate weirdest into weird meat? O.o
Okay, to be fair, the Vampires „Charm“ ability is phrased VERY differently than „Charm Person“ and so using the argument of „if charm person can’t do it the charm ability of the vampire can’t do it either“ dosen’t really work. The charm effect of the vampire really is a lot closer to a dominante spell than a charm person. However, I also don’t think the charmed pc would immediately try to nuke their friends, perhaps first try using some of their lower level or control spells, but if the vampire keeps the charm up long enough and begins to convince the pc that they are only protecting themselves (perhaps pull a move akin to Palpatine in RotS) the pc would use more lethal force.
As for the elf thing, idk this seems like a petty thing where either side could’ve backed down but after the charm incident/argument either side was too proud to get up of their high horse and probably should’ve either aired out their issues earlier or just not play with each other.
"Your love is weird!" 🤣
There was this moment in a campaign I was running when the party was supposed to be abused, but the first attack roll I made was a 1, so the ambusher fell from their tree. In the end, the party still got to the next story beat, but just in a VERY different way than I had planned lmao
"In the heart of elven power~" Loved that line.
*Looks sadly at table*
Well, there are elves here.
Everyone in the room where there are indeed elves: "uh yeah? there are"
and that should've been the end of it
that was
the weirdest railroad
All I see is Mollymauk on the thumbnail and now I’m happy/sad/choked up/reminiscing
18:51
Holy shit, is that a Community reference?
I'm gay irl but most of my characters are bi and I pick whatever character mine have best chemistry with regardless of gender
That story with the warlock... sometimes what's right for the character is to let them go. Let them become an enemy if that's what feels right, or leave for whatever reason is fitting for them. It could have been an epic ending for that character. What's right for your character does not always mean the rest of the group is obligated to go along with it. Ultimately this game is about being part of a team. If your character does not fit in with the team, you need to either make a character who does, or maybe it's not the game for you.
I actually thought that could've been a really cool exit for that warlock character.
From what I hear, if the warlock stuck to his character going to the dark side and either let him become an NPC or just go onto the sunset, no one would object to that, considering he was asked that he may need to get a new character to go on playing. Rather it's the backpedalling what was supposed to be a redemption arc and then demanding a concurrent evil arc focusing on just you. The warlock seems more like a spotlight hog who spotted his chance than someone who wanted to play along.
Now I want a BBEG to Charm the party and then just... hang out with them
The weirdest railroad 😂
Was that "your love is weird" a Community reference?
Railroading asshole DM... geez.
But it does make a comparison to how the Gods work in my DMing. Like sometimes yeah they will take offense to a joke, they won't go for LITERAL TORTURE! but they will like, throw a lightning bolt at you. It doesn't happen often like lightning bolts just raining out of the blue everywhere but it's an occurrence that if someone is hit by lightning it is an in world joke to say "oh, guess the gods hate you."
And if it happens then it's a CON save, if you succeed it is half damage. And then an Insight check to see if you realize which god you may have offended.
And the Damage depends on the severity of the offense. Like a moderately rude joke could be 3d6. but like the ULTIMATE BLASPHEMY! could be like 6d8 so there's indicators to what you did and why it happened. It's you know... FAIR.
Story 3: Seems like an easy fix to me. The whole weight of local authority comes down on the player's heads, impressing upon them just how fucked they are, then some slimy authority figure offers them an out to go do some morally questionable job for them in exchange for sweeping the whole circus incident under the carpet. They go off for the job, maybe they do morally questionable thing, maybe they decide not to; either way, slimy person and some goons show up at the worst possible time to sweep _them_ under the carpet too. Just a rough idea that occurred to me in five minutes. I'm sure it could be refined into something better.
"Your love is weird!"
The weirdest railroad
God Punishes Player For Joke:
You know I would be interested in hearing the nonfriend players thoughts on the OP. Yeah the GM was railroading and kept doubling down/twisting rules. But by the accounting the OP decided to.... dig in heels and double down even more when conflict arose and made it public during session? Derailing the enjoyment for everyone while he butts heads with the DM. I feel we are only seeing cherry picked behavior here and our OP boyo was no less horrible on the DM. O
❤therwise the other players wouldn't have been so quick to team up to jump down his throat.
'Everyone's TA here. And honestly I use this lightly in the DM's case and maybe other players's case because his 'crime' seems to be.... being a railroad DM and not knowing how to handle an aggressive rules lawyer in a calm frame of mind? A 'bad' gm maybe. But he can grow.
I mean I dunno. We only have salty rage quit OP's glasses painted to give him the best light to look through to this scene.
Aesop's Corner: Extreme railroading is bad, DMs. Strongly establish what you have adjusted via spells and rules, and the stick to them. Especially for homebrew. If there are parts of the story you REALLY want to have happen in a certain way, discuss them now or before that session and see if you can work with the players to find a compromise. I personally do recommend a more fluid style but hey. Also try to think a bit outside the box when it comes to spicing up a similar encounter that seemed too easy. Instead of twisting a spell to do something completely new and not established as changed, maybe.... this DM could have worked a small side encounter with a TOTALLY NEW magic item.... say a necklace or such that the vampire had managed to slip on the player that went turncoat.
Granted she probably went heavy handed with the Moonbeam spell but can't lie that is generally my first go to spell of a dangerous encounter (to the point the gang i usually play with made me a special token for it) so uuuuh. Ahem c.c
Players. There is a time and place to be firm about your concerns with the campaign. It is not. I repeat NOT in the middle of the session, stopping the session so you can go on a crusade about how this is absolute bullshit logic. And yes. Even if the DM is being an asshole. A good wait of approaching the first example? Bringing up the character's background allowing for knowledge and using an identify spell? Fair to ask. But even if the DM answers that he twisted the way the spell works in the most annoying way possible for his world, try to keep the tone along the lines of 'Okay then don't mind pedalling back, please tell us how the spell differs from the book?' And saving the constructive crits for AFTER SESSION or any requests for cementing spell changes so it doesn't completely stop the game while you play Unstoppable Force vs Immovable Object.
Ultimately if the DM is still playing or acting in a way you don't see as a fit you should politely leave the campaign. Too many times I see people saying it is an asshole thing to do or they don't like confrontation or a number of other reasons they wouldn't admit to (stubborn pride for this OP maybe). But there are far more rude things. And you should first and foremost remember that fun is fun. Not everyone has the same style or taste in fun. Try not to let yourself fall for the trap of 'social contract means you need to put up with terrible things'.
I think Warlock betraying the party isn’t a huge problem story wise, if it works into his backstory they covered with the DM the totally fine. Their reluctance to roll a new character and hunt down their old character is the issue.
According to the story, that Warlock was supposed to regret his Pact and seek redemption, so joining the evil scholar makes no sense for what the player told the DM. Like a lawful good paladin doing evil.
@@ArcCaravan Yes but a pact isn’t broken just because you regret it. I said before it wouldn’t be a huge issue story wise because as a DM I could think of a few reason to make it work, assuming the player agreed (but I don’t think this one would). I played a character with a similar backstory, a hag gave him his powers but I’m the pact be basically became a walking camera and he’d have to act on her interest in the world.
@@ggrowwarrior Based on the post this wasn't the Warlock being controlled by his patron (which would be the DM's choice or at least require approval beforehand), the player just made his warlock act out of character to join a villain of his own will.
@@ArcCaravan It sounded like the DM accepted the pivot in the players action even though it went against what they said and was completely unexpected. DM didn’t kick player or retcon the betray, they just asked that the player roll a new character to continue playing. The player reluctance to play something different and their insistence on having an entire side campaign was the issue. The DM even asked were they the AH for making the player roll a new character.
@@ggrowwarrior Almost everyone I've heard ask AITA were obviously not and just self-conscious. The fact the player lied about his character's intended story and expected everything to work out for him irks me a lot. Changing character sounds like punishment, at least in this instance. And retcons are generally a last resort, probably only an option if the player refused to leave or change characters.
The Weirdest Railroad!
That skit was great! I'd love to see how this could be done, even if the idea downright idiotic as a narrative.
Frustrating Game story: I know a lot of horror stories occur because people are being doormats, but this DM is just inane.
Why are some DMs so picky about their players making characters exactly like them? I noticed the first DM I played with (then boyfriend, now ex) seemed to not like people making characters that weren't the same gender as them, or at the very least when I did so. My first character was a good aligned female that had a romance with an NPC I liked, but in another zombie themed campaign I made a neutral evil scientist and had a chaotic good teenage boy as my backup (I'm a girl, of course, and neither of those characters had much interest in romance given their personalities and the setting). He actively attempted to kill the scientist, and told me an NPC in the party would've just shot the backup character for being "a mouthy teenager" when he would've had multiple reasons to be wary of the party but still opt to stick with them purely for survival and potentially bond later because he needed a trusted adult figure in his life for support and guidance. I got the distinct impression what he _wanted_ was for me to make a sexy Ada Wong type character that he could romance, as when I was throwing out ideas I mentioned making a female police officer or maybe a government agent of some kind, which he seemed interested in, and less so when I also suggested a male scientist who was flirty with everyone but notably leaning towards gay (just without the stereotypes, he wasn't going to act flirty because he was gay but simply because that was just his personality, in a more lighthearted and playful way rather than genuine attempts at affection/romance) and thus wouldn't really end up with a romance in the campaign as a couple of other PCs were teens (hence the backup character concept) and the majority of adult characters were NPCs the DM was playing. Guess he just wanted his gf in the game so he could romance the character, but only if it was a female character because he couldnt stand the thought of a gay/lesbian romance or _gasp_ *no romance???*
I don't really know my own sexuality/romantic preferences to be honest (though demi/ace seems pretty likely), but I tend to make characters who don't have specific preferences so that I can ship them with whoever I want. Or at the very least, their romantic preferences aren't important to me until I can see them paired with a particular character, at which point I'll decide if they're into men/women/both/etc. I have tons of OCs who are in non-hetero relationships, unlike when I was a teenager where that was basically all of the relationships I'd create
“You’re not gay, so you can’t play a gay character!”
Sounds like a very Twitter argument.
Guess I'm not allowed to play straight characters anymore. And I'm the DM so that's gonna result in a world where everyone's gay I guess. 😅😂
"Make up a side story for me alone on the spot" is a wild reaction to clear consequences for actions.. however "the ancient God rewards your efforts with death" and tada he has his side story, it's tied up and we can move on with or without him.
wierdest railroad
Personally, for Story 1, I think having your character betray the party and run off to join the villain is a fun idea. Like, I'd talk to the GM about it first, and I wouldn't expect to keep playing them, though I think doing a sort of informal one on one session with the GM to cover what the character does while with the BBEG (at least initially) isn't unreasonable.
The h-weirdest railroad
Last story: Pretty obvious what the problem was there. DM had a fragile ego. They couldn't stand being wrong about anything and they were completely incapable to reverse course once they started on something. They were probably already salty at narrator for questioning them earlier, overreacted to something narrator did and completely invested their pride in being "right".
Lol the joke story is nice if a bit wacky villain origin story.
How my character's mission became finding the way to murder this God and genocide his entire faith 😂
I am so sorry... that i burned your temple and salted the earth around the ruins😂
The weirdest railroad.
Im the goliath story at the end, i feel the DM AND player were both bad 😂
So anyways I just started blasting
Hold on... if the gods cared that much... where was the goliath paladin's god? Shouldn't a rival god attacking another god's paladin result in god od god action?
The Weirdest railroad.
18:15 Shukuro Tsukishima be like :
Omg just make it *magic* seduction, DM >_>