I didn't forget "Know the rules." While I would appreciate a player knowing their class, I can help with that. It's hard for me to help them with the other stuff, that requires more self-motivation.
Less "know the rules" more "read the rules" because I forget things all the time, I objectively have more things to remember than they do, but if a player forgets a rule and, instead of looking at me expectantly, cracks open the book's table of contents to locate it, I don't have to.
I DM a lot at an open table at a game store. This means large groups (6-10 and occasionally more) and inconsistent attendance, though I do have a core of about 5 players who are present nearly every week. I'm very fortunate that in general it's a great group of people, but even among them there are a few stand-out behaviors that REALLY make it work so much better than it could. 1. In combat several of my regulars will preroll their dice for their turn, leaving them visible and grouped logically in case any of the other players care to verify. This greatly speeds up their turns, and in general shows that they really care about everyone else's time as well. 2. My players are all pretty knowledgeable, and when I need clarification on a rule I can always turn to one of them and ask them to look up the pertinent details. The assistance is great, and the willingness of the rest of the players to keep moving while it is being resolved keeps everything much easier than it could be. 3. The biggest though, is that when we have new players join -often for their very first d&d game ever- the table ALWAYS makes a spontaneous effort to draw that player into the story and action. I've got plenty of stories of bad player behavior. We all do. But these positive behaviors are far more common for me, and are a lot more fun to share with others.
I don't got time to watch the video rn, but I can answer the question prompt the title provides. I really like it when a player gets so invested in my setting they want to help write lore for it. That's the best
Very good points! It reminds me of Seth Skorkowsky's "RPG Social Contract" video - role playing is a group effort, and in some respects, players need to accommodate for the DM just as much as the DM accommodates for them :)
Really liked the point of having each others backs and being aware of others at the table as your friends/fellow players. There’s a saying ‘A rising tide raises all ships’, and I think that can apply to ttrpgs. Looking out for each other and being aware of what another player or the DM might need, does make it more fun for everyone. The most recent example I can think of is how one of my friends was really conscious of how loot was divided even at the early stages of the game. I followed their lead of trying to be aware of the amount/type of rewards we were getting, especially as we progressed. This led me to realize I was finding most of the hidden magic items because my investigation had a +11. No one was mad at me, but there were times I could tell it was frustrating. Initially I would just give another character an item and say my character did it because they couldn’t use it/didn’t want to worry about selling it when they could have gold upfront (as a player my friends knew exactly why I was doing it because they know me 😂). Rather than diminish any of my fun, it turned into great roleplay and strategy because we all started discussing who could use what better, doing swaps during downtime and coming up with plans that only worked if everyone could use a different item at a different location at the same time. Plus when another player found something that would help my character or an item they could tell I’d really like, they had no issue swapping it with me or choosing gold over the item. We were all playing neutral evil characters too, but we found a way to make it make sense. I think it made it more fun for our DM too and let him give our opponents more magical items to use against us. He could rely on us as players to not derail things with an argument over who got if we were able to loot the bosses. And he loved throwing scary bosses at us!
7:49 most of this video has been great so far but I gotta disagree here. If the player gets a natural 20 and still doesn't succeed, then you as the DM shouldn't have made them roll. In that situation, you were setting them up for disappointment and there was nothing they could do about it. If a DC would be higher than a player could do, just tell them it's not possible instead of giving them a false hope
Depends. If the wizard is trying to lift a gate it might take more than a Nat 20 as they have no athletics. But the barbarian or the fighter, because of their bonus may only need to have rolled a 16 for whatever this challenge is.
I was thinking it's circumstantial, if one person can't do it, that doesn't mean they all can't. Though I do see your point in if it's nigh impossible that could be a conundrum. The problem I have with telling is that you take away some of the roleplay, instead let them see that they might not be able to open it now but later on, perhaps when they find an item, gain a level, etc., they will be able to open it. This is particularly true in an open world setting where players can go into areas too high for their level. Part of the onus is on the players to realize when they are over their heads in an area rather than to post signs all over the place saying you're not high enough level for this area. Again, I do see your point if you haven't been told the kind of game you're playing, this is why session zeroes are so important. Cheers
I agree with you, but only to an extent. The GM shouldn't really be expected to keep in mind every PC's skill check modifiers. Edit: Also, Guidance, Bardic inspiration, and a few other things can change whether a DC can be beaten. And you don't know if the player would try to use any of them on the check.
I understand that a nat 20 doesn't equal a success, but your example of a Wizard lifting a gate isn't in line with what you were saying, you used Dungeon Meshi as an on screen visual example of what you're articulating, even showing Chilchuck, the party Rogue/trap finder, as part of your example... Why? It was clear when you made this assertion that you were talking about a Rogue and you even showed a Rogue in your video in a position that they clearly failed a roll. I don't understand why though...
Because i had to cut a 2 minute story and out of the two examples i had used i chose to keep the piece with a video clip to change up what was on the screen
2:21 I don't necessarily agree with this. If you have a group all excited for a certain type of game and one person doesn't wanna play that game, then maybe that's just not the game for them. There's going to be nuances depending on the situation. I don't think there is a one size fits all solution for that scenario.
I agree but, I think it depends a lot on why your running. I play with one consistent group of 4 so for those games I always make sure it's a game all of them can enjoy, I'm making the game purely for those players. If I'm making a game to run at the shop I usually have an idea going in, if someone wants to join but, doesn't like that campaign idea then I won't change it, they can play in the next one.
@chazzle3459 If It's odd that I hearted this one, it's because I agree depending on the circumstances. Same as @DMKat there. I've always played with roommates, family, friends, and people I hope would become friends. I invited them to play with me. I'm not going to turn around and say, "Well I really had my heart on playing a Grim Dark fantasy game, so I guess I'll see if you want in on the next game in 6 months to a year." But a lot of people don't play that way. If you're playing in something organized, at a con or a local game store, then the players and DM don't really have an attachment. They can just move on to another table or join in the next month when the short campaign is done, like an LFR group or pick-up basketball game. Maybe even if you've got a ton of folks that all DM and run games throughout the week, missing out on one of the games isn't a big deal.
Your opening remarks crystallize my thoughts exactly! There are way too many people out there who treat their friends who DM as though they were getting paid.
My first dm was really bad and rude and wasn't nice to me (tried to end my characters journey before it even started, considered me stuttering and stumbling about of my characters speech instead of just me struggling to explain what my character was doing, getting annoyed when I got excited over things) and the 2nd one I met when I was having too much mental health issues to focus on the game anyway so even though he was awesome I just went nonverbal too many times so I just started watching. So I wanna get back into the game but just too afraid of bothering a DM.
That sounds tough and I can understand how that must have turned you off of this wonderful game. With the right DM, group and PROACTIVE COMMUNICATION ON YOUR PART, I think you'll find a campaign you'll feel safe in. I've had a fellow player who had access needs that we weren't aware of before we started play. They had trouble gettin out what they wanted to say when it was their turn and all eyes were on them, and verbally shut down sometimes as well on their turn. Luckily everyone at the table was compassionate and mature and just waited, maybe having some quiet side convos when it happened. This is what a safe table looks like. Everyone has different triggers, but you'd be best served by discussing these issues with a potential DM beforehand and seeing if they're the right fit for you and vice versa. I recommend looking for Adventurer's League games in your area as they have safety rules and are more open to the myriad of needs we all have. Good luck!
It sounds like you have issues that can be addressed with some creative ideas. If you are playing in person, it is important to tell the DM if you have a disability no matter what it is. In this way, he can adjust accordingly. It is not fair to assume a DM knows anything about you. That being said and from the limited information you presented I would say, if I was your DM to have some cards written down to explain your actions. You can use index cards and a sharpie and write basic actions such as, I attack [My character uses his sword, bow, mace, etc.], I cast a spell [Magic Missile, Knock, or Detect magic], I go left, right, straight, etc. Anything that you would speak you can write down. Then just hand the card to the DM on your turn. If you're in a VTT setting, then just type in chat. I hope that this helps you in your quest to play an RPG. As for bothering a DM, it's our job as DM's to try an accommodate a player when we can, but it's also our job to say that we don't want to. I think a DM is doing you a favor if they say no, up front rather than becoming annoyed with you, which does a disservice to you and to him. I hope this helps.
Are you in the Ireland region? England? America ? Etc if your in the Irish region? Some of my players have a habit of not turning up so I'm trying to find consistent players and I am thinking of making a second DM campaign as this one trouble player has left me stuck several times when the campaign would be focused on them which has left me creating on the spot alot of other side missions and taken away from the immersion
Now I'm inspired to play 'Bardy Mcfly' in a gothic horror game. Just a cheerful lad that will get his hopes and dreams crushed, but still he smiles and plays a tune. Only now his cheery music is replaced with a somber but hopefull melody. Sadly I already have at least 5 characters I'd rather play. So no spiting @DMwaDJ for me. Besides intentionally misconstruing your argument ;)
As a DM, one could always tweak the goofy name to be semi-genre fitting. I have a gnome character named Phylett Mignon (pronounced filet mig-non). Phyl for short. "Bardy McFly" could be Bardet McFleigh (pron. Barday McFlay) for example. Still goofy, but more reasonable.
As a player this is a game about exploring dungeons, solving puzzles and killing monsters. As a GM my game is about taking whatever random shit comes out of your facehole, run with it and convince you I had planned fuck all going in.
I have been a DM/GM for 50 years, and even with that much experience running games and dealing with a wide variety of players and playing styles, I still run into challenges in dealing with power gamers who are also rules lawyers. I want these players to have fun and be excited and invested in their characters (as I do for all my players). But, sometimes this kind of player keeps pushing a little too hard, and it can feel like they are out to ‘break the game’. I really do not think this is their goal, but I do think at times they are completely unconcerned about the fact that what they are trying to do will break the game. Unfortunately, lots of game systems have flaws or are just not designed well enough to foresee all the possible problems with certain combinations of character abilities. So, sometimes the DM/GM has to adjust the rules to maintain balance in the game (“sorry about that Nerf, let’s do a little Retcon to reconfigure your character a little”). I think the hard part is getting across to that kind of player why balance is so important for maintaining a long term campaign. It preserves the longevity and more importantly the fun for all the players and the DM/GM. This is a collaborative game where everyone at the table needs to have fun. If one player gets to outshine all the other players most of the time, it diminishes the fun for everyone else.
Or you can always just talk to that player and explain everything you wrote here, I think that's very reasonable, and if that player still chooses to be unreasonable and go out of their way to break the game then maybe they aren't a good fit for your game
Wizards with fire ball and artificer rogues with Molotov cocktails. I played with two individuals who in the same campaign one a rogue artificer and the other person ran a wizard, I was a cleric, the dm had to invoke my god 3 times, once when the rogue slapped the ground in front of me with a 20ft radius bottle of magic fire, the next campaign the wizard missed his fireball and hit me in the back of the head. The last time the rogue tossed a self made “Greek fire” or bottle of napalm at the bbg while he grabbed me. I told the gm to just let me die this time. He did and the rogue looked at the wizard, and he at him. The dm had Anhur smack the WIZARD with lightning. Party of 5 became a party of 3 and the bbg was still up. The traumatized party of 3 became a party of 0 real quick. Dm said “who got backup character sheets?” None of us did. Funny thing is wizzy boi and emo sad sad are asking me if I want to dm for them..
The Mists take whoever and from wherever. I can see this character having a ROUGH wake up in Barovia. If both you and your DM are that good at storytelling and actually playing both tragedy and character progression coming from the rock bottom, I'd say, go for it. But it won't be nice. And it needs to be pre-discussed (and both sides need to trust the other extremely well), because it IS hard for either side. And if any side has too much of reservations, not doing it is the better call. --- On the other hand, the same Bardy McFly has no real way to even come to existence in the world of Dark Sun. So, he doesn't belong _there_.
11:46 Um... I think this was your fault. As both a DM and an occasional Power Gamer, if the party makes Hulk Smash their default solution then it is up to you as a Dungeon Master to confront them with scenarios where Hulk Smash is not an effective solution. Taking away their character and then punishing them for making a character you deem to be too strong is not a solution it's just the DM slapping the player in the face for wanting to play the game in a way they find fun even when from the sounds of it the entire party was on board with Hulk Smash. I am not blaming you for getting this wrong because DMing is a learning process but I hope that you don't learn the lesson that it sounds like you are saying "Power gaming is fine but if you are too good at it then you are playing the game wrong"
You are willing to change the game completely to fit the needs of one player so that potentially all could enjoy the game? Nah, that player needs to find a new group so everyone else can enjoy the game they want to play.
As a fellow denizen of the mitten state, I am appalled that you would blame our unofficial state bush, the venerable orange construction cone, on your lacking punctuality! Jokes aside, I'm glad I have a group that needs none of this advice. Videos like this, and the necessity of them, make me appreciate my players all the more.
My typical game is a sandbox style, I don’t make forward plans more than a session in advance. I have a theme in mind, this one is “demonic invasion during civil war,” but the players picked that out of 4 options provided. They get a map and a few possible adventures session 1 and wait to find out what they’re interested in. I have run published adventures at the request of players, like CoS, but it’s not my preference. I want to be surprised by the players, and I want them to respect my effort and each other. By all means do something like draining my water temple of all water with shape stone at the base. Or make a pact with a demon at the end of a dungeon. That’s funny and creative. Doing things that are funny and creative is different than treating the DMs effort as something amusing.
@DMwaDJ I apologize, I only know you from your video and how it's presented, and I just didn't get your personal style from what I saw, I respect every and anyone that chooses to DM, but I felt like there was a DM vs. Player "vibe" from this video. I also don't want you to feel negative from my commentary or anything, you seem really passionate about the game and I love that, but I feel like your video felt slightly antagonistic, but that's just my perception. I think you might benefit from longer form content where you can speak more openly about your style, I would certainly be willing to listen. And I'm subscribing to your channel and I'm sure I'm wrong about everything, but I feel like you're finding your voice in this sea of content, and all I'm gonna say is keep going and don't censor yourself or cut yourself off for time's sake. You got this.
Also total side note, I think that a back light or fill light behind you would look good, it would help break up your silhouette and make it so your dark hair doesn't blend into the background, you can do that on the cheap with a floor lamp or 2 right behind you just out of frame, I'm a personal fan of using 4000k (daylight) lights for photo/video work it's easiest to alter in post production. I look forward to seeing everything you do
@@DTHogwood No need to apologize! =) You took time to watch and comment. I respond to anyone I believe is genuinely asking a question and I have an answer to give. My personality and my DMing style may not be for everyone. Some people took issue with me changing the campaign I run for my friends. If they're involved in something like Adventurers League, I see their point-changing campaigns mid-way isn't fair to the DM or to the other players. I don't play in Adventurers League. All the groups I've played with are either friends, roommates, family, or people I hope will become friends. I’m not going to tell someone to leave the group for six months to a year just so we can play a different campaign. The video is, in a way, antagonistic. I tried to focus mostly on the player behaviors I enjoy, but mentioning what you like defines what you don’t like. There are certain things that really spoil the game for me, and my players already know those things. I feel like I should just be upfront about it on the channel, so people know who they're watching. Regarding the lighting, yes, I do need to add some backlighting. I have a bunch of LED strip lights that I plan to put inside the cabinet behind me. If I don't light it up, any light behind me will cause reflections on the glass. In some of my earlier videos, you can see the reflection of me waving my hands even more than in this one. Time to learn how to solder and hope I don't burn down the house with a wire short.
@@DMwaDJ TL;DR - I apologize for judging you and your DM style without having adequate information, definitely a serious misunderstanding on my part. Since then I watched most of your videos and have become a lifelong supporter. Keep it up man! I feel like the RUclips algorithm really screwed up on this one, that definitely shouldn't have been the first video of yours recommended to me, I should have been pointed in your direction a while ago. But I'm certainly not going to entirely blame RUclips, because I was wrong. I should have taken the time to watch more of your videos before throwing out my commentary or criticisms. Which I started doing, and I've gotten through about a third of them now... And I didn't want to respond further to comments until I had a better understanding of your style as a DM and got to know you better as a content creator, because I had zero frame of reference when I was introduced to your channel though your most recent video. I think your video on Character Death and Player Grief really taught me a lot about your style, very excellent video. Actually all the videos I've seen so far are all well thought out and well constructed. You really excel at providing examples that drive your point home in a way that's relatable for both players and DMs. I genuinely think your video about roleplaying a Chaotic Neutral character should be required viewing for all new players. So I took the time to rewatch this video after getting more familiar with your channel and your style, it certainly gave me better context. Correct me if I'm wrong but you seemed like you were simply airing out your grievances regarding certain players and player types, which is absolutely your right, as a DM you put in way more effort than any other player. And certain players can just ruin everyone's fun, and I'm sorry for being one of those players before. Thank you for what you're doing and what you're providing to the DnD community with your videos.
Saying the game master is a player too is like saying a general is a civilian too. It is not true, I think the biggest issue D&D or any table has is that they want to make the person running the table a player. They are not, they are there to play, the GM is there to run the game. A better example is those games where there are players, contestants trying to win and get a big prize, and then you have the host. Is the host a player, a contestant? They are not. They have a different role to play than the players and contestants. Here is the main thing: - Players. Their main goal is focus on their story, hopefully succeeding and being able to accomplish their goals, but fate is determined by the dice. They are meant to solve any challenge, problem, conflicts. - GM. They aren't really supposed to succeed, they are supposed to lose, but fate is determined by the dice. They aren't meant to create a world, but problems and conflicts for the players to solve. Ultimately, GM's aren ot players. They are just another person who is having fun at the table, they have a different role to fulfill that doesn't align to the players'.
I think the people saying GMs are players too are defining player as anyone "playing the game". Playing the game meaning you are interacting with the game rules at all. It's much more broad than your definition and just helps remind people that you are there to have fun too, not entertain.
@@deadwhip1077 That still applies it, is the host playing the game? A GM is nothing other than a game host. Any game that has a host, look at all of them. Do you consider the host a player or they have an entirely different role than a player? They do have the same job, they make sure it is fair, they run a system where they have a chance of getting something out of it. A Game Master is nothing but a host. Not a player. A player cannot host the game and if they do, they become the host.
This is a very narrow minded view of what a "player" is. The GM is also there to play the game, therefore they are a player. They are *not* there just to run the game for the amusement and entertainment of the players. TTRPGs and game shows are different because you can't "win" D&D. It's a collaborative game. The point of saying that the GM is also a player isn't to say that their role in-game is the same as everyone else. It's to remind people that the GM deserves to have fun too.
@@wizardspells Not really a narrow minded, I think a lot of people mistake what are the roles for in the first place. If both were players, then they would be players and there would not be a GM. As a GM I want my players to outsmart me, I want my players to come up with solutions I didn't think of, I want them to interact with the world I've created. As a GM I cannot give them the solutions to the problems. I'm the puzzle maker, the toy maker, the conflict creator, but at no point I'm there to solve their issues. If a GM is a player too, then the GM needs to have a GMPC at the table. GM have a different type of fun compared to the palyers and I think people overlook that, and by saying GM are players too encourage a lot of GM to TPK because tehy are players too and they need to win. GM's deserve fun, but our fun as GM is different from the players. It's not the same. It is the same with the hosts in any game, they have fun by giving problems and puzzles to their players and if they solve them they get excited. They get to have fun, if they don't, well, I actually get sad they couldn't figure it out or they overlook important things.
I didn't forget "Know the rules." While I would appreciate a player knowing their class, I can help with that. It's hard for me to help them with the other stuff, that requires more self-motivation.
Less "know the rules" more "read the rules" because I forget things all the time, I objectively have more things to remember than they do, but if a player forgets a rule and, instead of looking at me expectantly, cracks open the book's table of contents to locate it, I don't have to.
I DM a lot at an open table at a game store. This means large groups (6-10 and occasionally more) and inconsistent attendance, though I do have a core of about 5 players who are present nearly every week. I'm very fortunate that in general it's a great group of people, but even among them there are a few stand-out behaviors that REALLY make it work so much better than it could.
1. In combat several of my regulars will preroll their dice for their turn, leaving them visible and grouped logically in case any of the other players care to verify. This greatly speeds up their turns, and in general shows that they really care about everyone else's time as well.
2. My players are all pretty knowledgeable, and when I need clarification on a rule I can always turn to one of them and ask them to look up the pertinent details. The assistance is great, and the willingness of the rest of the players to keep moving while it is being resolved keeps everything much easier than it could be.
3. The biggest though, is that when we have new players join -often for their very first d&d game ever- the table ALWAYS makes a spontaneous effort to draw that player into the story and action.
I've got plenty of stories of bad player behavior. We all do. But these positive behaviors are far more common for me, and are a lot more fun to share with others.
I kind of hate players rolling dice without being asked to
I don't got time to watch the video rn, but I can answer the question prompt the title provides. I really like it when a player gets so invested in my setting they want to help write lore for it. That's the best
Very good points! It reminds me of Seth Skorkowsky's "RPG Social Contract" video - role playing is a group effort, and in some respects, players need to accommodate for the DM just as much as the DM accommodates for them :)
Really liked the point of having each others backs and being aware of others at the table as your friends/fellow players. There’s a saying ‘A rising tide raises all ships’, and I think that can apply to ttrpgs. Looking out for each other and being aware of what another player or the DM might need, does make it more fun for everyone.
The most recent example I can think of is how one of my friends was really conscious of how loot was divided even at the early stages of the game. I followed their lead of trying to be aware of the amount/type of rewards we were getting, especially as we progressed. This led me to realize I was finding most of the hidden magic items because my investigation had a +11. No one was mad at me, but there were times I could tell it was frustrating.
Initially I would just give another character an item and say my character did it because they couldn’t use it/didn’t want to worry about selling it when they could have gold upfront (as a player my friends knew exactly why I was doing it because they know me 😂). Rather than diminish any of my fun, it turned into great roleplay and strategy because we all started discussing who could use what better, doing swaps during downtime and coming up with plans that only worked if everyone could use a different item at a different location at the same time.
Plus when another player found something that would help my character or an item they could tell I’d really like, they had no issue swapping it with me or choosing gold over the item. We were all playing neutral evil characters too, but we found a way to make it make sense. I think it made it more fun for our DM too and let him give our opponents more magical items to use against us. He could rely on us as players to not derail things with an argument over who got if we were able to loot the bosses. And he loved throwing scary bosses at us!
7:49 most of this video has been great so far but I gotta disagree here. If the player gets a natural 20 and still doesn't succeed, then you as the DM shouldn't have made them roll. In that situation, you were setting them up for disappointment and there was nothing they could do about it. If a DC would be higher than a player could do, just tell them it's not possible instead of giving them a false hope
Depends. If the wizard is trying to lift a gate it might take more than a Nat 20 as they have no athletics. But the barbarian or the fighter, because of their bonus may only need to have rolled a 16 for whatever this challenge is.
I was thinking it's circumstantial, if one person can't do it, that doesn't mean they all can't. Though I do see your point in if it's nigh impossible that could be a conundrum. The problem I have with telling is that you take away some of the roleplay, instead let them see that they might not be able to open it now but later on, perhaps when they find an item, gain a level, etc., they will be able to open it. This is particularly true in an open world setting where players can go into areas too high for their level. Part of the onus is on the players to realize when they are over their heads in an area rather than to post signs all over the place saying you're not high enough level for this area. Again, I do see your point if you haven't been told the kind of game you're playing, this is why session zeroes are so important. Cheers
I agree with you, but only to an extent. The GM shouldn't really be expected to keep in mind every PC's skill check modifiers.
Edit: Also, Guidance, Bardic inspiration, and a few other things can change whether a DC can be beaten. And you don't know if the player would try to use any of them on the check.
I understand that a nat 20 doesn't equal a success, but your example of a Wizard lifting a gate isn't in line with what you were saying, you used Dungeon Meshi as an on screen visual example of what you're articulating, even showing Chilchuck, the party Rogue/trap finder, as part of your example...
Why?
It was clear when you made this assertion that you were talking about a Rogue and you even showed a Rogue in your video in a position that they clearly failed a roll. I don't understand why though...
Because i had to cut a 2 minute story and out of the two examples i had used i chose to keep the piece with a video clip to change up what was on the screen
2:21 I don't necessarily agree with this. If you have a group all excited for a certain type of game and one person doesn't wanna play that game, then maybe that's just not the game for them. There's going to be nuances depending on the situation. I don't think there is a one size fits all solution for that scenario.
I agree but, I think it depends a lot on why your running. I play with one consistent group of 4 so for those games I always make sure it's a game all of them can enjoy, I'm making the game purely for those players. If I'm making a game to run at the shop I usually have an idea going in, if someone wants to join but, doesn't like that campaign idea then I won't change it, they can play in the next one.
@chazzle3459 If It's odd that I hearted this one, it's because I agree depending on the circumstances. Same as @DMKat there. I've always played with roommates, family, friends, and people I hope would become friends. I invited them to play with me. I'm not going to turn around and say, "Well I really had my heart on playing a Grim Dark fantasy game, so I guess I'll see if you want in on the next game in 6 months to a year."
But a lot of people don't play that way. If you're playing in something organized, at a con or a local game store, then the players and DM don't really have an attachment. They can just move on to another table or join in the next month when the short campaign is done, like an LFR group or pick-up basketball game. Maybe even if you've got a ton of folks that all DM and run games throughout the week, missing out on one of the games isn't a big deal.
Your opening remarks crystallize my thoughts exactly! There are way too many people out there who treat their friends who DM as though they were getting paid.
No. 1 rule to be a fun player: engage creatively with the situations that come up.
They don't know the horrors of Michigan "road repair" season.
Army of orange cones sounds like an interesting one shot.
My first dm was really bad and rude and wasn't nice to me (tried to end my characters journey before it even started, considered me stuttering and stumbling about of my characters speech instead of just me struggling to explain what my character was doing, getting annoyed when I got excited over things) and the 2nd one I met when I was having too much mental health issues to focus on the game anyway so even though he was awesome I just went nonverbal too many times so I just started watching. So I wanna get back into the game but just too afraid of bothering a DM.
That sounds tough and I can understand how that must have turned you off of this wonderful game. With the right DM, group and PROACTIVE COMMUNICATION ON YOUR PART, I think you'll find a campaign you'll feel safe in.
I've had a fellow player who had access needs that we weren't aware of before we started play. They had trouble gettin out what they wanted to say when it was their turn and all eyes were on them, and verbally shut down sometimes as well on their turn. Luckily everyone at the table was compassionate and mature and just waited, maybe having some quiet side convos when it happened. This is what a safe table looks like.
Everyone has different triggers, but you'd be best served by discussing these issues with a potential DM beforehand and seeing if they're the right fit for you and vice versa.
I recommend looking for Adventurer's League games in your area as they have safety rules and are more open to the myriad of needs we all have. Good luck!
It sounds like you have issues that can be addressed with some creative ideas. If you are playing in person, it is important to tell the DM if you have a disability no matter what it is. In this way, he can adjust accordingly. It is not fair to assume a DM knows anything about you. That being said and from the limited information you presented I would say, if I was your DM to have some cards written down to explain your actions. You can use index cards and a sharpie and write basic actions such as, I attack [My character uses his sword, bow, mace, etc.], I cast a spell [Magic Missile, Knock, or Detect magic], I go left, right, straight, etc. Anything that you would speak you can write down. Then just hand the card to the DM on your turn. If you're in a VTT setting, then just type in chat. I hope that this helps you in your quest to play an RPG. As for bothering a DM, it's our job as DM's to try an accommodate a player when we can, but it's also our job to say that we don't want to. I think a DM is doing you a favor if they say no, up front rather than becoming annoyed with you, which does a disservice to you and to him. I hope this helps.
Are you in the Ireland region? England? America ? Etc if your in the Irish region? Some of my players have a habit of not turning up so I'm trying to find consistent players and I am thinking of making a second DM campaign as this one trouble player has left me stuck several times when the campaign would be focused on them which has left me creating on the spot alot of other side missions and taken away from the immersion
Now I'm inspired to play 'Bardy Mcfly' in a gothic horror game. Just a cheerful lad that will get his hopes and dreams crushed, but still he smiles and plays a tune. Only now his cheery music is replaced with a somber but hopefull melody. Sadly I already have at least 5 characters I'd rather play. So no spiting @DMwaDJ for me. Besides intentionally misconstruing your argument ;)
As a DM, one could always tweak the goofy name to be semi-genre fitting.
I have a gnome character named Phylett Mignon (pronounced filet mig-non). Phyl for short.
"Bardy McFly" could be Bardet McFleigh (pron. Barday McFlay) for example. Still goofy, but more reasonable.
As a player this is a game about exploring dungeons, solving puzzles and killing monsters.
As a GM my game is about taking whatever random shit comes out of your facehole, run with it and convince you I had planned fuck all going in.
I have been a DM/GM for 50 years, and even with that much experience running games and dealing with a wide variety of players and playing styles, I still run into challenges in dealing with power gamers who are also rules lawyers. I want these players to have fun and be excited and invested in their characters (as I do for all my players). But, sometimes this kind of player keeps pushing a little too hard, and it can feel like they are out to ‘break the game’. I really do not think this is their goal, but I do think at times they are completely unconcerned about the fact that what they are trying to do will break the game.
Unfortunately, lots of game systems have flaws or are just not designed well enough to foresee all the possible problems with certain combinations of character abilities. So, sometimes the DM/GM has to adjust the rules to maintain balance in the game (“sorry about that Nerf, let’s do a little Retcon to reconfigure your character a little”).
I think the hard part is getting across to that kind of player why balance is so important for maintaining a long term campaign. It preserves the longevity and more importantly the fun for all the players and the DM/GM. This is a collaborative game where everyone at the table needs to have fun. If one player gets to outshine all the other players most of the time, it diminishes the fun for everyone else.
Or you can always just talk to that player and explain everything you wrote here, I think that's very reasonable, and if that player still chooses to be unreasonable and go out of their way to break the game then maybe they aren't a good fit for your game
Using the word nerf probably doesn't help, considering the soft useless connotation
Great video!
Thank you!
Wizards with fire ball and artificer rogues with Molotov cocktails. I played with two individuals who in the same campaign one a rogue artificer and the other person ran a wizard, I was a cleric, the dm had to invoke my god 3 times, once when the rogue slapped the ground in front of me with a 20ft radius bottle of magic fire, the next campaign the wizard missed his fireball and hit me in the back of the head. The last time the rogue tossed a self made “Greek fire” or bottle of napalm at the bbg while he grabbed me. I told the gm to just let me die this time. He did and the rogue looked at the wizard, and he at him. The dm had Anhur smack the WIZARD with lightning. Party of 5 became a party of 3 and the bbg was still up. The traumatized party of 3 became a party of 0 real quick. Dm said “who got backup character sheets?” None of us did. Funny thing is wizzy boi and emo sad sad are asking me if I want to dm for them..
Good video
Thanks!
Michigan, we have 2 seasons. Winter and construction.
What?!?! Bardy McFly, the Casio electic keyboard playing calico doesn't belong in Barovia?
The Mists take whoever and from wherever. I can see this character having a ROUGH wake up in Barovia. If both you and your DM are that good at storytelling and actually playing both tragedy and character progression coming from the rock bottom, I'd say, go for it. But it won't be nice.
And it needs to be pre-discussed (and both sides need to trust the other extremely well), because it IS hard for either side. And if any side has too much of reservations, not doing it is the better call.
---
On the other hand, the same Bardy McFly has no real way to even come to existence in the world of Dark Sun. So, he doesn't belong _there_.
In a version of Barovia based on “Dracula dead and loving it” or “young Frankenstein” absolutely
Interesting video. This definitely shows the growth in solo play games….
nice!!!
🤷🏼 Some people want to play GTA inside D&D
11:46 Um... I think this was your fault.
As both a DM and an occasional Power Gamer, if the party makes Hulk Smash their default solution then it is up to you as a Dungeon Master to confront them with scenarios where Hulk Smash is not an effective solution.
Taking away their character and then punishing them for making a character you deem to be too strong is not a solution it's just the DM slapping the player in the face for wanting to play the game in a way they find fun even when from the sounds of it the entire party was on board with Hulk Smash.
I am not blaming you for getting this wrong because DMing is a learning process but I hope that you don't learn the lesson that it sounds like you are saying "Power gaming is fine but if you are too good at it then you are playing the game wrong"
You are willing to change the game completely to fit the needs of one player so that potentially all could enjoy the game? Nah, that player needs to find a new group so everyone else can enjoy the game they want to play.
Consequences to actions is vastly overstated. I suggest the idea that the game is actually about meaningful choices.
As a fellow denizen of the mitten state, I am appalled that you would blame our unofficial state bush, the venerable orange construction cone, on your lacking punctuality!
Jokes aside, I'm glad I have a group that needs none of this advice. Videos like this, and the necessity of them, make me appreciate my players all the more.
You seem like you get emotional at the table and don't like when your grand plans are thwarted
My typical game is a sandbox style, I don’t make forward plans more than a session in advance. I have a theme in mind, this one is “demonic invasion during civil war,” but the players picked that out of 4 options provided. They get a map and a few possible adventures session 1 and wait to find out what they’re interested in. I have run published adventures at the request of players, like CoS, but it’s not my preference. I want to be surprised by the players, and I want them to respect my effort and each other. By all means do something like draining my water temple of all water with shape stone at the base. Or make a pact with a demon at the end of a dungeon. That’s funny and creative. Doing things that are funny and creative is different than treating the DMs effort as something amusing.
@DMwaDJ I apologize, I only know you from your video and how it's presented, and I just didn't get your personal style from what I saw, I respect every and anyone that chooses to DM, but I felt like there was a DM vs. Player "vibe" from this video. I also don't want you to feel negative from my commentary or anything, you seem really passionate about the game and I love that, but I feel like your video felt slightly antagonistic, but that's just my perception. I think you might benefit from longer form content where you can speak more openly about your style, I would certainly be willing to listen. And I'm subscribing to your channel and I'm sure I'm wrong about everything, but I feel like you're finding your voice in this sea of content, and all I'm gonna say is keep going and don't censor yourself or cut yourself off for time's sake. You got this.
Also total side note, I think that a back light or fill light behind you would look good, it would help break up your silhouette and make it so your dark hair doesn't blend into the background, you can do that on the cheap with a floor lamp or 2 right behind you just out of frame, I'm a personal fan of using 4000k (daylight) lights for photo/video work it's easiest to alter in post production.
I look forward to seeing everything you do
@@DTHogwood No need to apologize! =) You took time to watch and comment.
I respond to anyone I believe is genuinely asking a question and I have an answer to give. My personality and my DMing style may not be for everyone. Some people took issue with me changing the campaign I run for my friends. If they're involved in something like Adventurers League, I see their point-changing campaigns mid-way isn't fair to the DM or to the other players. I don't play in Adventurers League. All the groups I've played with are either friends, roommates, family, or people I hope will become friends. I’m not going to tell someone to leave the group for six months to a year just so we can play a different campaign.
The video is, in a way, antagonistic. I tried to focus mostly on the player behaviors I enjoy, but mentioning what you like defines what you don’t like. There are certain things that really spoil the game for me, and my players already know those things. I feel like I should just be upfront about it on the channel, so people know who they're watching.
Regarding the lighting, yes, I do need to add some backlighting. I have a bunch of LED strip lights that I plan to put inside the cabinet behind me. If I don't light it up, any light behind me will cause reflections on the glass. In some of my earlier videos, you can see the reflection of me waving my hands even more than in this one. Time to learn how to solder and hope I don't burn down the house with a wire short.
@@DMwaDJ TL;DR - I apologize for judging you and your DM style without having adequate information, definitely a serious misunderstanding on my part. Since then I watched most of your videos and have become a lifelong supporter. Keep it up man!
I feel like the RUclips algorithm really screwed up on this one, that definitely shouldn't have been the first video of yours recommended to me, I should have been pointed in your direction a while ago.
But I'm certainly not going to entirely blame RUclips, because I was wrong. I should have taken the time to watch more of your videos before throwing out my commentary or criticisms. Which I started doing, and I've gotten through about a third of them now...
And I didn't want to respond further to comments until I had a better understanding of your style as a DM and got to know you better as a content creator, because I had zero frame of reference when I was introduced to your channel though your most recent video.
I think your video on Character Death and Player Grief really taught me a lot about your style, very excellent video. Actually all the videos I've seen so far are all well thought out and well constructed. You really excel at providing examples that drive your point home in a way that's relatable for both players and DMs.
I genuinely think your video about roleplaying a Chaotic Neutral character should be required viewing for all new players.
So I took the time to rewatch this video after getting more familiar with your channel and your style, it certainly gave me better context. Correct me if I'm wrong but you seemed like you were simply airing out your grievances regarding certain players and player types, which is absolutely your right, as a DM you put in way more effort than any other player. And certain players can just ruin everyone's fun, and I'm sorry for being one of those players before. Thank you for what you're doing and what you're providing to the DnD community with your videos.
Saying the game master is a player too is like saying a general is a civilian too. It is not true, I think the biggest issue D&D or any table has is that they want to make the person running the table a player. They are not, they are there to play, the GM is there to run the game. A better example is those games where there are players, contestants trying to win and get a big prize, and then you have the host. Is the host a player, a contestant? They are not. They have a different role to play than the players and contestants.
Here is the main thing:
- Players. Their main goal is focus on their story, hopefully succeeding and being able to accomplish their goals, but fate is determined by the dice. They are meant to solve any challenge, problem, conflicts.
- GM. They aren't really supposed to succeed, they are supposed to lose, but fate is determined by the dice. They aren't meant to create a world, but problems and conflicts for the players to solve.
Ultimately, GM's aren ot players. They are just another person who is having fun at the table, they have a different role to fulfill that doesn't align to the players'.
I think the people saying GMs are players too are defining player as anyone "playing the game". Playing the game meaning you are interacting with the game rules at all. It's much more broad than your definition and just helps remind people that you are there to have fun too, not entertain.
@@deadwhip1077 That still applies it, is the host playing the game? A GM is nothing other than a game host. Any game that has a host, look at all of them. Do you consider the host a player or they have an entirely different role than a player? They do have the same job, they make sure it is fair, they run a system where they have a chance of getting something out of it.
A Game Master is nothing but a host. Not a player. A player cannot host the game and if they do, they become the host.
This is a very narrow minded view of what a "player" is. The GM is also there to play the game, therefore they are a player. They are *not* there just to run the game for the amusement and entertainment of the players. TTRPGs and game shows are different because you can't "win" D&D. It's a collaborative game. The point of saying that the GM is also a player isn't to say that their role in-game is the same as everyone else. It's to remind people that the GM deserves to have fun too.
@wizardspells Agreed. It's as simple as that. They are just way too hung up on terms that they are missing the point entirely.
@@wizardspells Not really a narrow minded, I think a lot of people mistake what are the roles for in the first place. If both were players, then they would be players and there would not be a GM.
As a GM I want my players to outsmart me, I want my players to come up with solutions I didn't think of, I want them to interact with the world I've created. As a GM I cannot give them the solutions to the problems. I'm the puzzle maker, the toy maker, the conflict creator, but at no point I'm there to solve their issues. If a GM is a player too, then the GM needs to have a GMPC at the table.
GM have a different type of fun compared to the palyers and I think people overlook that, and by saying GM are players too encourage a lot of GM to TPK because tehy are players too and they need to win.
GM's deserve fun, but our fun as GM is different from the players. It's not the same. It is the same with the hosts in any game, they have fun by giving problems and puzzles to their players and if they solve them they get excited. They get to have fun, if they don't, well, I actually get sad they couldn't figure it out or they overlook important things.