Thankfully it sounds like that "autistic" creep isn’t dangerous to children since he can’t stand sexual things, but this sounds worrying... I'm pretty sure he has been sexually abused as child.
"Oh please Mr. Man who complains about everything, loudly interrupts me, and tries to tell me what I'm allowed to have in my own world, please don't leave my game!"
"One day Doge is gonna read something so incredibly fucked up, it'll cut to him looking shocked and then wordlessly cut to cats." -A commenter on a video about a D&D player who wanted to pork his own sister
@perfect fitz yeah, some of the best people and biggest nerds I've ever met were in the army. My game group got pretty close to where we were almost family. But even we had a "that guy" in our group. We forcefully kicked him out because we got tired of his whineyness, creepiness and drama.
The first story is the type of DM that needs a Old Man Henderson to show up and teach him how little he knows about the sheer chaos of passionate roleplaying. Bullying like that does nothing but numb a person to make them more submissive, and trying to lie about the pain of humiliation making you better just proves how little skill roleplaying that DM has. Both of those come with life for free, and people like OP don't need a refresher course.
Story 1: I went from "Not allowing classes that don't fit isn't a red flag" to "That DM is the worst kind of abusive asshole" OP totally should have left, but at least he hung around long enough to piss of the DM Story 2: That Guy is the spiritual brother to the player who throws a tantrum because the DM won't let them play a carefree parrot Aarakocra in a human-centric grimdark campaign Story 3: *ERROR* Brain shutdown, rebooting in 3.....(seriously WTF?) Story 4: DM has more problems than just not understanding what Lawful Good is. Maybe he played a Paladin or Monk in Baldurs Gate 2 one too many times
We're gonna need A LOT MORE kittens to balance out the absolute HORROR contained in these stories. After watching this video I'm scared to play D&D with people I don't know
As a DM who runs one-shots; I can say (knocks on wood) I've been lucky so far. I think my session zeroes have been a great filter. Thanks to these dnd horror stories; they have served me well in what to look out for and such. Now I am prepping my first campaign and I am still worried who will come to my game.
Story 2: That Guy-“you better change it before I leave” *in a whiny neckbeard voice* OP should have been like “well start packing your shit, I ain’t changing jack”
@@vegeta002 if a That Guy is going to be an asshole to me over something in my game, I’m going to be an asshole back until they either stfu or gtfo and I won’t care at all which happens
Story 1 This is so heartbreaking. I know rp’ing as kids is hard… but this DM was a complete arsehole. Neutering Op’s character, forcing Op into a terrible [familial] relationship with Op’s consent, and backseat driving OP’s character.
To be fair in older editions there were rules for playing as kids, and they were pretty bad, it was full of penalties, like -2 to strength, con, wisdom and intelligence, and like +2 for dex. But if the character is gonna have such penalties, that's something the DM should have told them the moment they heard how old the character would be, not rip their character sheet to shreds right infront of them and force them to play a gimped character.
The one I found even worse was "the friend he was BF with who invited him!" He knew how the POS acted. Even laughed with him at the start of this mess! Which means he valued his relationship with the POS over OP! So good riddance for OP that the asshole left with the POS! To the asshole "friend" your "Best Friend" feels like the asshole type who ruins YOUR friendships without regard to keep you hanging around them and their toxicity! some people fall for the trick that your kind are "sad and pitiable" but I say your also assholes for not seeing them for what they are and subjecting people to this behavior! Then acting "shocked" when no one wants YOU around them as you defend them when they would NEVER DEFEND YOU AND YOU KNOW IT! So hope it was worth losing ACTUAL meaningful friendships for this asshole who's going to assure you have NO FRIENDS and stink as bad as he does by the end!
I know I played in one campaign that the entire party were a bunch of kids that had to leave an orphanage that was too poor to take care of us. We had our normally rolled stats... But the DM pretty much used the mentality that our physical abilities would be equivalent to our age. (So a 10 Strength, would be what a 10 Strength would be if they were a kid of that age.) My character became a powerful Wizard, who loved cooking, to the point that he was able to make his food magical, after being gifted a special cook book from an old druid. So you had this 10 year old wizard that was able to make candy with buffs with spells that would temporarily buff stats for a battle.
@@GhostBear3067 Seriously, do they really think anyone wants to deal with them? Everyone would be a lot happier if they could stick to it and not return. Yeah I'm sure the shop will miss the small amount you were going to spend...
"I hope his books never sell." *looks at the number of crappy books that are published and somehow sell* Uh... yeah... I'm pretty sure they're going to sell... what the heck is wrong with people...
@@RuinQueenofOblivion oh, I know. I'm watching a review series made by KrimsonRogue for a book called "Empress Theresa" and that book makes Twilight look like fucking Citizen Kane in comparison.
@@easiestcc6451 Oh you poor thing, I've watched that one. There are others out there that are worse than Twilight too though. If you like KrimsonRogue I also suggest looking up Reads With Rachel or Julian Greystoke.
I wonder if the fetish guy is the same one I ran into a few times on DeviantArt that would somehow get by the block feature. They would introduce themselves as "Autistic and doing fine" and then before you even agreed to a RP would send a link to a page for changing a mentally disabled eight year olds diaper and ask for you to go into detail on the diaper changing. And when you tell them your reporting them claim they are "Just trying to spread awareness" or some crap like that. I had to block them like 4 times and post a ticket about them magically getting unblocked. Then again a had a few others try to slip fetish into RPs and then claim some mental health reason. At least the block worked for them.
Sadly, you've got a lot of of people with mental health issues and apparently they've been taught it makes them special and they don't have behave like civilized human beings. So they behave like diseased animals.
Theres a special place in hell for that kind of person. In my opinion as an autistic person myself, If you have to resort to "I have *insert mental health condition* so don't call me out like that, ableist!" When you get called out like that, Then just admit you're a narcissist because thats something that a Narcissist usually does when they get called out. If anything, weaponizing mental health conditions like that actually makes *them* the ableist.
I put my artwork on DA, it's all SFW but the amount of requests for drawing smut of CHILD characters is insane. And it's always some creepy fetish they try to sneak past me.
"All Celestials are Lawful Good" *looks at my incarnated Celestial character who's Chaotic Good* Riiiight... I know that's BS even for 3.5e. There's several Celestials from that era that are Neutral Good and Chaotic Good too. Also that DM just doesn't know how Lawful Good works either
Agreed. A Lawful Good character does understand that he can't just expect taverns and inns to just cover everything cause he's a paladin. And weapons and armour need regular maintenance. Plus supplies and rations... it adds up. If a character took a vow of poverty, then it would be something else. But the lawful good character is not like what he described. A Lawful good character would protect his ally with the way he would feel far more comfortable doing. Since the player was playing a Ranger, he would defer to his archery. He feels most comfortable that way. I had a Lawful Good Catfolk Paladin who had to play politics because he was stuck in a siege, and had to protect the people from being butchered by a Dark Elf army, and he was dealing with multiple factions that were causing problems. Unfortunately, the Rogue wasn't really experienced, one fighter preferred to follow, the other was an idiot, and the wizard was as smart as a rock. (The paladin once told him to let him (The paladin) do the thinking for him" (The wizard) So he had to work on dealing with politics. Many of the high end figures were too influential to just cut them down. He had to figure out who was trustworthy, who he couldn't... And he had to forge letters to set up one of the figures to say that he was going to sell everyone out... Only to actually find a letter that the guy was going to sell them out anyways. So he was able to sneak out and perform an investigation on the guy. The Dwarf tried to send the Mages out first, when the Paladin recalled them, and ordered the head Dwarf to switch the formation to Dwarves in front of Wizards, or else he was going to push him off the walls. He had to ruin the reputation of the head priest, and make him look like a charlatan... He played politics and had to apply very dirty tactics... Why didn't he lose his Paladinhood? His chief god was Odin, who approved of those methods. He understood that the Paladin swore to protect the people within that fort, and thought that it was the proper way to deal with things, especially after trying the virtuous speech. He was still lawful good. He manipulated the law, to ensure the people would be safe. And this is what brings forth the question... Should his paladinhood be determined by his methods, or by him doing the right thing to save the people?
Ah that last story, I've been in a game with a player like that, truly lawful stupid. He'd insult us in and out of character for accepting a reward for saving a town, as "that just makes you cutthroat scummy mercenaries, you're evil", insulted us for looting the bodies of enemies as "no good aligned character would steal from the dead, you're evil!", insulted us for mercy killing a gravely wounded soldier after we were told he was too far gone for healing spells to save him "you just murdered an innocent guard, you're evil!" and so many other things... Dude was impossible to play with.
@@valivali8104 Oh yeah of course, it's not the player's fault whatsoever. The DM's wrong anyway, you can be lawful good and still have your own personality and decisions.
Its always kinda funny when they think the lawful good response to everything is to throw yourself head first into danger to save someone with no regard for your own welfare but if you end up dead then who's going to help them now? Like what the DM made him do could easily have resulted in him dying and then the wizard? dying because that's not the way he was best suited to help and he would know that. He can do more to help at range as he was.
@@shadenox8164 Yup! I said so myself just the other day "lawful good doesn't mean lawful stupid", it's like those DMs who insist any lawful good character MUST make their presence known to the enemy, offer the chance to surrender, then issue a fair challenge, then if they win the fight they've gotta travel back two weeks to have their enemy put on trial. That's not how it is, you can even have lawful good assassins, who will only take jobs to assassinate the evil and do it under a code.
@@PaladinGear15 Hell as a counterpoint one of my current characters is chaotic good because he doesn't much care for the rules so much as doing good. Yet, he's the party member best equipped to actually do things by the book and will if it means helping people. Though as a quirk his personal filing system takes some learning, because it only makes sense to him.
I'm sorry, if someone has to... Touch themselves just because of a certain thought that comes around that involves a kink and children... That guy's 100% p. As they say they're not sexually attracted to that type of situation, they're either lying, or they seriously have something messed up more.
My guess is that last DM looked at an alignment chart meme and believed that only the strictest and most extreme examples counted. Except for chaotic neutral which in their mind means “lol I’m so random” and is just a way for a player to be inconsistent
The worst part about roleplaying as a hobby is that there is a murky mire of power tripping DMs and bad players ready to ruin sessions and turn away newcomers. Your first experiences in just about anything in life inform you if you want to keep doing it or not. It can be just as well be such a great and rewarding hobby though, one through which you can make a lot of new friends. I probably wouldn't know around 15-20 people, some of them close friends, if I had never taken up a friend on his offer to introduce me to P&P back in 2012.
The further back you go the easier it was. D&D players were the outcast nerds when I started playing and we warmly welcomed anyone who wasn't actively bullying us. I won't say our games weren't absolute shitshows of murderhoboing and terrible decisions, but everyone had fun together
Someone, heck ANYONE, telling me “You need to fix this before I leave.” would be the quickest way to startle a laugh out of me. Like…ok? You really think the loss of your company is a punishment? 🤨
I once had someone block me on Facebook because he hated my firearms rules. He wasn't even in any of my games but I stated that guns in my fantasy games are only late Medieval handgonnes. No revolvers, lever actions, repeaters, etc. Just simple, primitive handgonnes that only fire once every other round. He was so angry that he blocked me.
@@Michael-fd1gx to be honest, that is a class I am not a real fan of in most settings. Though I currently only run one 5e game only because we haven't transitioned them yet to C&C as I have my other ones.
@@rootfish2671 I laugh all of the time because online everyone's all, "It's your game, do what you want." That is until you do something that they don't like or want, then they have a problem with it. I don't care what some rando thinks nor would I change the rules if he was in my games. It's how the world works and you're not getting a revolver. As I have said to several before, if revolvers existed than everyone would have one.
@@Doodle1776 i love how people act like they are the rpg police and going to arrest you for settings crimes. yeah that guy would crap his pants at my setting the human kingdom capital has magic powered lamp posts, magic mirror billboards and hand held magic mirrors like cell phones. Not To mention a ton of airships, flying brooms and magic carpets flying around for travel and trade. I also have goblins with higher level technology like black powder bombs and clockwork assassins.
Third story: please get that guy on a watch registry. That is disturbing on so many levels Last story: That DM is an idiot, and is forcing a LG character to actually be Lawful stupid. Paladins are a prime example of LG, and they accept payment for work (as that arrangement was effectively a contract and thus lawful) and are supposed to be tactical in combat, so negating both is against the alignment (both in general and as the system). That DM should just not run a game if he doesn't want players to play, or specify that he only runs CN campaigns, since he'd probably take away choices based on alignment for all the other alignments as well
Once played a game where we rolled on tables to see what alignment/class/race we got to make. It was interesting. Chaotic evil, Goblin Paladin. Even dark gods have champions.
THANK YOU FOR THE KITTY SECURITY IN THE THIRD STORY!! God bless this doggo, f*cking christ, I like fuzzy and cute character and my players have their liking too but.... My god...
The third story was a disaster. And, I have to employ the press X to doubt meme there. People online in particular will make excuses and use things, whether or not they apply to them towards that end.
Story 1: I would've just left right then and there if the DM ripped up my character sheets Story 2: "How dare you include guns in a fantasy setting you made that clearly said that guns were as common as Swords and Magic? You better change your setting before I leave!" Thats what the That Guy sounded like Story 3: Title Alone made me skip straight to Story 4 Story 4: Ah...Lawful Stupid, where the Player(s) aren't allowed to do anything, cause someone want to be a buzz kill and dictate how things go
Dm: That's not what a lawful good character does! They do this instead! If you're at the point where you dictate a player's actions like this, then why even let them make a character in the first place?
1st: DM sucks but I feel friend was worse for enabling that stuff. 2nd: Players who don't read setting notes the DM sends are a burden on the game. 3rd: The guy is seriously weird. I would be worried he would be a danger to kids. 4th: Alignment is more trouble than it's worth and DM sucks.
Sadly it can be summed up in two simple words, Rule #34. Well maybe one word if you add the numerals and 3 words if you type it out in full. Still it is to quote Irwin from The Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy, "That's messed up, Yo!"
Pompous DM Story. That in no way will improve anyone's role playing. I have a feeling Army DM didn't do that kind of crap with other soldiers. They would have invited him to a dance real quick. I was in the Navy. And I've thrown fists for less than that.
Alignment is not there so the DM can take control away from player characters. Alignment is meant to be a reflection of the sum of all the actions a character has taken. Players can take whatever actions they want, regardless of alignment. That's why alignment can change - it's supposed to reflect their actions, not guide them. Also, has this DM never heard of Elysium? The Bestlands? Arboria? There are tons of Neutral Good and Chaotic Good celestials! Also, the current ruler of the first circle of the Nine Hells is a celestial - celestials can turn evil and change alignment just as much as anyone else! If this was a homebrew setting, it's a terrible one.
I...won't lie, I think the pompous DM was being a massive asshole, but I personally ain't keen on playing with people who use 5 different characters for their own character, it takes a lot of time and spotlight. It was a good idea actually, but more as a DMNPC, not a player, I feel. Granted, also don't know this person personally, so...neutral input. Friend was also a bit of a dick. Fuck that Lawful/Stupid dm. "Did you have fun?" made me think of Blizzard's D4 panel "Don't you guys have phones?" ugh
While you do have a point, I think what solidifies the first DM as a dung beetle is the fact that in private he said that the op could play the character, but when the op is at first session he chooses to humiliate him in front of everyone by tearing up his character sheet in front of everyone like a cliche highschool movie bully. We can be almost sure that the stunt was preplanned with his friend who laughed and that the pair of dinguses wanted to humiliate the op just because. Maybe "friend" held a grudge against op due to some minor incident while he was dming. An adult would have denied the ops character in private and told him to prepare another.
For the second story. For those who don't understand gunslingers in fantasy allow me to point you to the Dark Tower series a dark fantasy series written by Stephen King. It's definitely not your conventional fantasy but it is still fantasy and one of the most complex and amazing fantasy stories I've read in a long time. To say gunslingers don't belong in fantasy is gatekeeping and stupid anyway. Not all fantasy is knights and castles.
I'll never understand people who vehemently say that tech and fantasy don't mix. That's such a limited understanding of what fantasy can be and shows a lack of creativity on the part of those who say this. Just look at the Dwarves in Dragon Age, they have advanced technology because their race is incapable of possessing magic. Or Final Fantasy 7? There "magic" (materia) is developed through scientific innovation by utilizing the planets supernatural/spiritual life force. In fact most of the Final Fantasy games, even those with more stereotypical magic, still have advanced tech with an in world reason as to why.
Hell, there were even black powder firearms in many parts of medieval Europe, mostly in Eastern Europe using some armaments acquired from the Byzantine empire
Last story. I get the "Celestials must be Lawful good" part, though there are types of Celestials that range into chaotic. But his definition of LG is a bit extreme. He could possibly make a case that a celestial is the extremity of the alignment, but he would need to have that conversation before they start, and work out what things they can and cannot do without hampering celestial ideals.
8:15 "I've never played in a game with guns that wasn't a mess." To be fair, it was the same for me. 2 games ended after a single session, one with the DM blocking everyone. The third game was kind of okay, except for me playing a monk with 13 dexterity and 12 wisdom.
In my experience, it usually comes from people trying homebrew firearms into a setting that didn't have them normally. Pathfinder 1e does have rules for firearms as well as differing rules that change based on how common they are. DnD relies on 3rd party or homebrew to add firearms and it leads to some... oddities.
story 3: Wait, WHAT?! I'm gonna need at least 4 full ballads sung by lucky to get over that one. So is anyone calling the cops on him or are we gonna wait until he spells it out during his underage SA trial that him being autistic is somehow a logical defense.....
Dear Gods below... Was gonna comment on the others but that third story took the cake and made the rest seem tame. That's a predator in the making either way. Dude needs help and was likely lying or hasn't realized how bad it can get.
Though I have to add... I still hate alignments when they are super reinforced. People are more complex than that. As a general idea, it works, but I've seen people do things outside their alignment that works.
@@rootfish2671 I agree, but many DMs do use it as a cudgel and it doesn't seem to enhance the story in my experience. Why have something ya don't need? If it works for your table, cool, but I'd rather not give people ammo to lock others down.
@@PrideOfFantasy100 I skipped using alignment in my Pathfinder 2e setting because all of the characters are 1st time players and the book doesn't have a definition for each alignment just a vague definition of what good, evil, lawful, neutral and chaotic is which is fine if you're a veteran to these games but was too confusing to newbies so I just skipped it since all of the players are not playing evil characters anyway
@@rootfish2671 I tend to prefer just asking for some positive and negative traits that can help RP. Like maybe they are alcoholic or a habitual liar but charitable or very protective of their friends. Usually does the trick with newbies and vets alike and makes it easier to set up RP situations for me.
Why are so many people against guns in conventional fantasy settings? In actual Medieval times across the world, simple guns and cannons, while not exactly common, were well known enough to be found in many armies at the time. Also, its a fantasy setting, its up to you what goes into it, what level technology is available, and what the cultures and attitudes of the people there are, why not have a setting with common guns?
Most people have their technology at medieval settings before the invention of gun powder and are stuck in the medieval Europe/Tolkien type settings. Even AD&D had stats for an Aquebus, a black powder gun so it's not unheard of. In my setting I have goblins invent things like machines and bombs.
@@rootfish2671 My setting is a Renaissance/Early Modern "Davincipunk" world, where Repeating Crossbows and Firearms, War Machines like Wood-armored Tanks and Auto-carriages, Robot-like Automata such as Golems, Flying machines of all sorts, and magical telegram offices are commonplace, and the worlds analog to Venice is a main area for the setting, and is arguably the most influential city in that world.
the main weapon of samurai was a rifle. people are weird about disliking guns, even though pulling out a gun is like a wizard shouting 'magic missile'. same shit.
Honestly, the Lawful Stupid story got me thinking how it's sort of wild that so many players have their "edgy first characters." Most of the first characters I've made in RPGs were pretty vanilla. Mostly because that's what DMs I played under would generally approve. A few even insisted that playing an elf made you some sort of "special snowflake" (don't even talk to them about half elves.) So I ended up playing nearly all humans for years. Funnily enough, one of the DMs that would hardly ever approve elves would brag about how his first character was a red dragon. No, he would not let you play as as dragon either. TL:DR, I'm a bit jealous that I don't have a wacky, cringey first-time player character. That's a D&D trope that I missed out on.
They see edgy characters as powerful and want their own version of Drizzt or Batman or whatever. I think it's a lack of imagination and not thinking outside of the box. People need to realize there are plenty of kinds of rogues that aren't dark edgy brooding thieves in black leather. Robin hood could be considered a rogue, so can Catwoman.
Last one: depending on the edition of d&d they were playing, the dm was not to far off from RAW. The paladin could not use poison, attack from surprise, had to defend the weak, and donated money paid because they were trying to make a classic knight in shining armor. You got all kinds of powers, free armor, free weapons, and a steed as a trade off, but you basically were an Arthurian knight bound by a strict moral code. That having been said, you could always choose to break your code. Alignment had a exp penalty if you broke it, but you can start out a sir Gwen the Good and transition into "greedy Gwen" the theif. Though this needed a discussion on what the alignments meant at the point of conflict. Generally, alignments are useful for a summery of a character's expected behavior, but it has to mean the same thing to everyone otherwise it just causes confusion.
What would Lawful good do? Watch the beginning of the Angel series where the only reason he charges people to help them is so they do not feel indebted to him. Not saying Angel is a lawful character just a good example of why a goody two shoes character would accept a reward.
Story 2 Why can’t guns belong in fantasy? Gunpower and firearms existed for a very long time-and even then, DND isn’t historically accurate. I love having a musketeer bard, rapier and musket or hand gun. And then there is the artillerist and gunslinger subclasses. Hell, I made a cowboy-themed ranger (because Rangers should be able to use firearms)
I believe Warhammer is also a fantasy game and guns are commonly used there, with the the greatest guns in the world usually being the Dwarf-crafted ones.
Год назад+2
I'm running a flintlock fantasy game in 5e with slightly homebrewed guns (higher damage but long loading times) and it's going well so far. Guns are a mainstay of a number of historical periods that spawned plenty of great stories (golden age of piracy, the eighty years' war, the cavalier years, the French revolution, Napoleonic wars, the Victorian era, the wild west, mid-19th century European revolutions, etc...), it's rather arbitrary to exclude them from "high fantasy" just because Tolkien didn't include them.
Had a kobold cowboy artillerist artificer who dual wielded his pistols, one was his wand used to fire his regular spells, other pistol was his eldritch cannon, fired with the bonus action. Flavored him to have caster shells as spell slots (Outlaw Star vibes) that he recharges himself at appropriate rests.
And the most long Ryan campaign, that I am in, I am a Ranger, I shoot things all day, with a bow and arrow granted, but I shoot things, all day. However, there is a faction in our game that is run mostly by drill, and they have pistols, we just rolled it. Please pardon dictation for the errors.
Every day I thank our lord and savior, Azathoth, for never allowing me to have a TTRPG experience like that third story. I've played with weirdos, sure, but they were weirdos that I was friends with beforehand. But that story was more disturbing than Lovecraftian tale of cosmic horror.
Okay, yeah, yeah...Number 3 is probably the most disturbing I've heard so far. Jesus Christ, Doge, how did you make it through reading that? I need an adult and I'm already an adult. I need an adultier adult.
@@violinfanatickamraz1403 I tend to love all animals but cats are waaayyy up there on the list. I have two. A little boy around 10 and an old tortie girl who is 20! And still pretty healthy though thin and more anti-social than she used to be. -shrugs- Still love them!
@@CallMeKes yeah. Sometimes I like animals way more than I like people except maybe my kids. Lol my cat is a calico. I love her patterns. Shes a good cat. Greets me when I wake and tucks me in.
Learn to Read Story. OMG! Mr. Annoying KNEW from the start what the game was going to be like. If Mr. Annoying was that set against playing in a game with guns he should have just said it wasn't for him and left it. Even later if he came to the realization he couldn't deal with it the mature thing to do is say sorry I'm just not having fun with the gun thing and leave. You don't demand everyone change the game to fit what you like. And if you can't find a game you like, MAKE ONE! Become the DM and craft your world however you want.
I would tell my players before playing that guns are part of the setting, but imagine demanding a gm remove something from their setting just because you personally don't like it.
As an autistic player: I did get my special interest (penguins) involved in my TTRPGs by asking a GM if I could flavour the eagle totem barbarian as a penguin totem barbarian. When someone else needed a player for their campaign, they told me "You can play a penguin" (aarakokra with swim speed instead of flight speed) and I was in.
In a cyberpunk game I had giant mutant penguins with metal cyberware beaks in Antarctica because they were partly experimented on and exposed to nuclear radiation
10:17 guns absolutely add to Fantasy even if they arnt black powder they can still belong, for example have the firearm use magic instead, as it is i plan to DM someday and i plan on firearms being OP (as there are reasons why swords and maces were abandoned) but counterable (as things like Riot shields and bullet proof vests exist)
Story 4 I hate how folks can be anal about their alignment and treat people like robots. Alignments, like The Code, are more like guidelines. As long as the Lawful good person is murderhoboing and raping, then I don’t see an issue.
Honestly it's lawful stupid in its purest form. The whole alignment lock bs is probably the weakest part of older editions, fortunately alot of DMs used them for just guidelines, but there are so many stories of DMs basically taking total control of PCs like this, especially if they were playing paladins, who HAD to always be lawful good, or they lose their powers
This is the second time I've had to use this example in response to a story like this in only a few days, which isn't a lot ect. ect. But first responders are taught to to be aware of their own safety first because if they get hurt they can't help anyone. Could you imagine anything more lawful good than a paramedic coming to help someone? So in that example with the zombie, he can best protect the other character at range. He can actually do LESS to help by doing what the DM made him.
@@shadenox8164 even combat medics are trained to take cover when under fire and even return fire if the chance comes up. Can't help the wounded if you're taken out yourself
So note. If I’m lawful good and I see a party member in trouble then the suicidal intervention instead of playing to my character’s strength. Good to know
Iv'e always loved the "guns in fantasy are unrealistic" argument because China literally had proto-guns in the 900s annd actual guns in the 1200s; meanwhile in Europe guns were first historically described in the 1200s as well and cannons in the 1300s. Medieval worlds _without_ guns are actually _less_ realistic - it's just that most medieval firearms were expensive to make, tended to blow up, and difficult to use, so they weren't widespread.
If your world has fireworks having black powder guns isn't a stretch technology wise. In my campaign I have gnomes & goblins access to higher level of technology due to their inventions like bombs or clockwork soldiers
When it comes to my lawful characters, i look at their "wills and woes" Basically your character traits with a bit of a stricter code. These can evolve through the story as well, but i will remind players of these traits when they do actions that go against them. Alignment changes in my campaigns, so its not like I permanently lock them into doing what they wrote. Characters should evolve like real people do.
"It will help you become a better roleplayer" as OP literally has zero control over what they're doing. I guess their eye of "Better roleplay" is their roleplay. But they dont sound like better roleplayers than OP, who sat through all of that.
The first story: The character sounded awesome... But the DM turned the character into what he wanted the character to be... So with the burning of the house, I think OP should have continued to observe what the DM found important to his story, and just burn it all down to the ground. Learn about the specific deity and what would cause the deity to renounce the Paladinhood for example... Just go all chaotic on him. I've seen players pull these kinds of stunts. I know one friend who could come across as a douche, even as a DM... But he would never do such a thing. In fact, he'd offer to be a DM for that guy, And completely destroy him. (In fact, he has contacts in the publishing industry, and would work to destroy that guy's books.)
That last story pisses me off. I like playing Lawful Good, it can be fun. And to me, *nothing* OP did would be against the alignment. Not even looting the bodies, because the werewolves might have had something on them to point to where they came from.
If the DM ever says they're writing a book based on the world or campaign they're running thats the sign to gtfo because that means you aren't a player to them; you're an actor who needs to take better direction and stick to the script and that ain't D&D
Even worse, they can steal your character like that DM claimed to do. Really bad if your character is more to you than just something to play a single tabletop game with.
Last DM was a complete idiot. Granted, aligment stuff is not easy to handle at times. But lawful good doesn't mean, you have to sacrifice yourself to rescue another player from a ZOMBIE. And I wish to see him argue to an actual police officer, that they can not have a paycheck. It is "lawful good", not "lawful altruistic stupid".
I have been playing RPGs for more than 30 years, and while I have had my fair share of horror experiences, story #3 is by far worse than anything I have personally experienced. It may be because I have a decent ability to read people and I tend to stay away from certain types of people, but geeze that sounds like an awful experience. I have booted people from my table for less
The progression of my thoughts: "Aw, that's kind of cute. Oh no, the balloon popped! How sad! Wait, what? WTF? NONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONO *radio static instead of b rainwaves*
About the third story and a bit of a warning for people who can't take cursed knowledge: Neurodivergent people can absolutely be pervs, it's not like they are mutually exclusive, it's just like any normal person but they tend to hide it for obvious reasons. In their case they might take an interest on whatever floats their boat and turn it into a fetish, in this case cutesy things, though that doesn't mean they have an interest on real children, they can separate sexual fiction from reality much like most people can tell the difference between fictional violence and IRL violence. There are whole ass communities centered around that even. The thing is, those communities, like many others, draw some very strict lines so they don't gross out random people and most importantly, not commit a crime, which is why their opinion on MAPs, to put it very lightly, is not great. Edging mid-session in secret without the consent of the other players was absolutely not okay in the slightest. Also, even if they're on the same boat, it is common courtesy not to shove fetishes onto other people's plate for obvious reasons. In short, Balloon Boy might have not been a .pdf but he was indeed a creepo.
I think you misunderstood the op, they didn't say neurodivergent people can't be perverted. They said it's not an excuse or justification for perverted behavior.
@@RiveroftheWither OP did say "The person claimed to have autism and he was high functioning. Even blaming his actions and odd behavior on him having autism. I don't think people with neurodivergence are pervs. (I'm neurodivergent myself)". He could be a poser for all I know but it is not unheard of as I explained. Still, it is indeed not an excuse, my point is being neurodivergent and being a pervert are not mutually exclusive, and even if their line of thought was on the hornier side, it does not justify him from engaging in obsene behavior.
@@YouW00t I think OP meant that he wasn't saying that Neurodivergent = Perv by definition, as opposed to Neurodivergent people are NEVER pervs. In other words, he wasn't trying to say that being neurodivergent makes one a perv or that dude was a perv BECAUSE he was neurodivergent. I think it was just slightly wonky wording.
The argumentation in the last part I feel doesn't encapsulate lawful good very well. It's not just that resources are helpful in being good, it's that "good" doesn't mean "selfless" and "lawful" only implies following a code. Accepting agreed upon payment is - by definition - lawful. And if the deed was good, then it's something a lawful good character can do and most likely would, because almost no one wants to play an ascetic saint.
I always say that you can tell a lot about a DM by how they view Lawful good, or Paladins. Lawful Good not shooting an arrow that might avoid injury to either player? That's ridiculous. If the character is playing an archer archetype character, then even as a lawful good character, he would defer to his most comfortable way of combat. And that's long range attacks. Refusing payment? Nope. A Lawful good character would donate it himself. And besides, it doesn't mean he has to be a pauper. He does need to maintain weapons and armour, and make sure he has rations, and equipment in order to continue his duties. I would not actually play by his rules. I would either a) malicious compliance, punishing every transgression I see, and going around to be a complete like a loon. Go all murderhobo on him. Get very literal. Or b) I would tell him that the "lawful" part is to his oath, and write down all his oaths he has sworn. He doesn't understand that some people would feel offended if handing payment is declined. Hell, I would comment that I would take it, and would donate a portion of it myself. I would tell him that my character would understand that there is no guarantee that the money would end up in charitable hands. Then there's another problem. Debts and favours. Many in both the underworld and with the nobility and church would see it that they have favours and debts to owe the person, and they will refuse to deny it.
![Lil Uzi Vert - Chill Bae [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/D7F42F_JM3U/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm just genuinely shocked you were able to get through the third story without deploying the kittens sooner.
Thankfully it sounds like that "autistic" creep isn’t dangerous to children since he can’t stand sexual things, but this sounds worrying... I'm pretty sure he has been sexually abused as child.
"Oh please Mr. Man who complains about everything, loudly interrupts me, and tries to tell me what I'm allowed to have in my own world, please don't leave my game!"
"The game will be so... much wOrSe with you gone." XD
"One day Doge is gonna read something so incredibly fucked up, it'll cut to him looking shocked and then wordlessly cut to cats."
-A commenter on a video about a D&D player who wanted to pork his own sister
It wasn't wordless though.
It got damn close tho.
Guy in the first story is definitely a piece of crap. It would've taken all my willpower to not punch him in the face after that
Same
In my game group, a few of us are a bunch of army vets. That Guy wouldn't be able to get out the door without getting curb stomped
@@unluckyone1655 yeah probably puts a bad taste in some people's mouths about vets which sucks.
@perfect fitz yeah, some of the best people and biggest nerds I've ever met were in the army. My game group got pretty close to where we were almost family. But even we had a "that guy" in our group. We forcefully kicked him out because we got tired of his whineyness, creepiness and drama.
I'm not violent by nature but I'd have have verbally ripped the DM a new one when he tore my character sheet
"He didn't seem to be in to anything sexual." He says about the guy touching himself in a latex suit
I assume they meant an interest in sex with other people
@@RiveroftheWither if cute innocent children voices turn you on, then no you don't have a sexual interest in other people. You have one in children.
@@RiveroftheWither Yeah, that's definitely a thing and it's pretty common in autism.
@@chelonianmobile No, not really. People who don't understand autism just commonly assume we're sexless or too childlike to be sexual.
The first story is the type of DM that needs a Old Man Henderson to show up and teach him how little he knows about the sheer chaos of passionate roleplaying. Bullying like that does nothing but numb a person to make them more submissive, and trying to lie about the pain of humiliation making you better just proves how little skill roleplaying that DM has. Both of those come with life for free, and people like OP don't need a refresher course.
Story 1: I went from "Not allowing classes that don't fit isn't a red flag" to "That DM is the worst kind of abusive asshole" OP totally should have left, but at least he hung around long enough to piss of the DM
Story 2: That Guy is the spiritual brother to the player who throws a tantrum because the DM won't let them play a carefree parrot Aarakocra in a human-centric grimdark campaign
Story 3: *ERROR* Brain shutdown, rebooting in 3.....(seriously WTF?)
Story 4: DM has more problems than just not understanding what Lawful Good is. Maybe he played a Paladin or Monk in Baldurs Gate 2 one too many times
We're gonna need A LOT MORE kittens to balance out the absolute HORROR contained in these stories. After watching this video I'm scared to play D&D with people I don't know
As a DM who runs one-shots; I can say (knocks on wood) I've been lucky so far. I think my session zeroes have been a great filter. Thanks to these dnd horror stories; they have served me well in what to look out for and such. Now I am prepping my first campaign and I am still worried who will come to my game.
I agree I need Simba to heal me from the horror cringe.
I took psychic damage from these stories
Its a sign of a good storyteller when both he and the audience go "wait, what?!" at the same time.
Story 2: That Guy-“you better change it before I leave” *in a whiny neckbeard voice*
OP should have been like “well start packing your shit, I ain’t changing jack”
I'd have just gone with a simple _"K, bye"_ with a friendly smile.
@@vegeta002 if a That Guy is going to be an asshole to me over something in my game, I’m going to be an asshole back until they either stfu or gtfo and I won’t care at all which happens
"Door's over there friend, don't let it hit you on the way out"
Story 1
This is so heartbreaking.
I know rp’ing as kids is hard… but this DM was a complete arsehole. Neutering Op’s character, forcing Op into a terrible [familial] relationship with Op’s consent, and backseat driving OP’s character.
To be fair in older editions there were rules for playing as kids, and they were pretty bad, it was full of penalties, like -2 to strength, con, wisdom and intelligence, and like +2 for dex.
But if the character is gonna have such penalties, that's something the DM should have told them the moment they heard how old the character would be, not rip their character sheet to shreds right infront of them and force them to play a gimped character.
The one I found even worse was "the friend he was BF with who invited him!" He knew how the POS acted. Even laughed with him at the start of this mess! Which means he valued his relationship with the POS over OP! So good riddance for OP that the asshole left with the POS! To the asshole "friend" your "Best Friend" feels like the asshole type who ruins YOUR friendships without regard to keep you hanging around them and their toxicity! some people fall for the trick that your kind are "sad and pitiable" but I say your also assholes for not seeing them for what they are and subjecting people to this behavior! Then acting "shocked" when no one wants YOU around them as you defend them when they would NEVER DEFEND YOU AND YOU KNOW IT! So hope it was worth losing ACTUAL meaningful friendships for this asshole who's going to assure you have NO FRIENDS and stink as bad as he does by the end!
@@PaladinGear15 I also heard there were penalities for playing women too in older versions which….
That is on the gamemakers for making stupid rules
I know I played in one campaign that the entire party were a bunch of kids that had to leave an orphanage that was too poor to take care of us.
We had our normally rolled stats... But the DM pretty much used the mentality that our physical abilities would be equivalent to our age. (So a 10 Strength, would be what a 10 Strength would be if they were a kid of that age.)
My character became a powerful Wizard, who loved cooking, to the point that he was able to make his food magical, after being gifted a special cook book from an old druid. So you had this 10 year old wizard that was able to make candy with buffs with spells that would temporarily buff stats for a battle.
The That guy reminds me of certain customers. Like is it a threat or a promise that you won't be back?
If I ever overhear a customer make such a threat while shopping I would ask if they could give that to the store in writing.
@@GhostBear3067 Seriously, do they really think anyone wants to deal with them? Everyone would be a lot happier if they could stick to it and not return. Yeah I'm sure the shop will miss the small amount you were going to spend...
"I hope his books never sell."
*looks at the number of crappy books that are published and somehow sell* Uh... yeah... I'm pretty sure they're going to sell... what the heck is wrong with people...
I mean how else did the Twilight series get popular?
@@easiestcc6451 and the popularity of Twilight knock off smut found on online amature writing sites.
@@easiestcc6451 This may shock you, because it shocked me too, but there are worse books out there than Twilight. MUCH WORSE!
@@RuinQueenofOblivion oh, I know. I'm watching a review series made by KrimsonRogue for a book called "Empress Theresa" and that book makes Twilight look like fucking Citizen Kane in comparison.
@@easiestcc6451 Oh you poor thing, I've watched that one. There are others out there that are worse than Twilight too though. If you like KrimsonRogue I also suggest looking up Reads With Rachel or Julian Greystoke.
I wonder if the fetish guy is the same one I ran into a few times on DeviantArt that would somehow get by the block feature. They would introduce themselves as "Autistic and doing fine" and then before you even agreed to a RP would send a link to a page for changing a mentally disabled eight year olds diaper and ask for you to go into detail on the diaper changing. And when you tell them your reporting them claim they are "Just trying to spread awareness" or some crap like that. I had to block them like 4 times and post a ticket about them magically getting unblocked.
Then again a had a few others try to slip fetish into RPs and then claim some mental health reason. At least the block worked for them.
I wouldn't be surprised, DA attracts some of the worst people I've ever seen. All the deranged fetish art ultimately made me switch to Attestation.
Sadly, you've got a lot of of people with mental health issues and apparently they've been taught it makes them special and they don't have behave like civilized human beings. So they behave like diseased animals.
Theres a special place in hell for that kind of person. In my opinion as an autistic person myself, If you have to resort to "I have *insert mental health condition* so don't call me out like that, ableist!" When you get called out like that, Then just admit you're a narcissist because thats something that a Narcissist usually does when they get called out.
If anything, weaponizing mental health conditions like that actually makes *them* the ableist.
I put my artwork on DA, it's all SFW but the amount of requests for drawing smut of CHILD characters is insane. And it's always some creepy fetish they try to sneak past me.
@@rootfish2671 I also draw sfw art on DA (though I sometimes draw gore/horror art) thankfully I haven't gotten a request like that yet
"All Celestials are Lawful Good" *looks at my incarnated Celestial character who's Chaotic Good* Riiiight...
I know that's BS even for 3.5e. There's several Celestials from that era that are Neutral Good and Chaotic Good too.
Also that DM just doesn't know how Lawful Good works either
Yeah. There's three different good realms, all with different alighments between the three good types.
Agreed. A Lawful Good character does understand that he can't just expect taverns and inns to just cover everything cause he's a paladin. And weapons and armour need regular maintenance. Plus supplies and rations... it adds up.
If a character took a vow of poverty, then it would be something else.
But the lawful good character is not like what he described.
A Lawful good character would protect his ally with the way he would feel far more comfortable doing. Since the player was playing a Ranger, he would defer to his archery. He feels most comfortable that way.
I had a Lawful Good Catfolk Paladin who had to play politics because he was stuck in a siege, and had to protect the people from being butchered by a Dark Elf army, and he was dealing with multiple factions that were causing problems. Unfortunately, the Rogue wasn't really experienced, one fighter preferred to follow, the other was an idiot, and the wizard was as smart as a rock. (The paladin once told him to let him (The paladin) do the thinking for him" (The wizard) So he had to work on dealing with politics. Many of the high end figures were too influential to just cut them down. He had to figure out who was trustworthy, who he couldn't... And he had to forge letters to set up one of the figures to say that he was going to sell everyone out... Only to actually find a letter that the guy was going to sell them out anyways. So he was able to sneak out and perform an investigation on the guy. The Dwarf tried to send the Mages out first, when the Paladin recalled them, and ordered the head Dwarf to switch the formation to Dwarves in front of Wizards, or else he was going to push him off the walls. He had to ruin the reputation of the head priest, and make him look like a charlatan... He played politics and had to apply very dirty tactics...
Why didn't he lose his Paladinhood? His chief god was Odin, who approved of those methods. He understood that the Paladin swore to protect the people within that fort, and thought that it was the proper way to deal with things, especially after trying the virtuous speech.
He was still lawful good. He manipulated the law, to ensure the people would be safe.
And this is what brings forth the question... Should his paladinhood be determined by his methods, or by him doing the right thing to save the people?
13:02 Good call on the emergency kitty protocol.
Ah that last story, I've been in a game with a player like that, truly lawful stupid.
He'd insult us in and out of character for accepting a reward for saving a town, as "that just makes you cutthroat scummy mercenaries, you're evil", insulted us for looting the bodies of enemies as "no good aligned character would steal from the dead, you're evil!", insulted us for mercy killing a gravely wounded soldier after we were told he was too far gone for healing spells to save him "you just murdered an innocent guard, you're evil!" and so many other things... Dude was impossible to play with.
Though in this case DM forced player into that role.
@@valivali8104 Oh yeah of course, it's not the player's fault whatsoever. The DM's wrong anyway, you can be lawful good and still have your own personality and decisions.
Its always kinda funny when they think the lawful good response to everything is to throw yourself head first into danger to save someone with no regard for your own welfare but if you end up dead then who's going to help them now?
Like what the DM made him do could easily have resulted in him dying and then the wizard? dying because that's not the way he was best suited to help and he would know that. He can do more to help at range as he was.
@@shadenox8164 Yup! I said so myself just the other day "lawful good doesn't mean lawful stupid", it's like those DMs who insist any lawful good character MUST make their presence known to the enemy, offer the chance to surrender, then issue a fair challenge, then if they win the fight they've gotta travel back two weeks to have their enemy put on trial. That's not how it is, you can even have lawful good assassins, who will only take jobs to assassinate the evil and do it under a code.
@@PaladinGear15 Hell as a counterpoint one of my current characters is chaotic good because he doesn't much care for the rules so much as doing good.
Yet, he's the party member best equipped to actually do things by the book and will if it means helping people. Though as a quirk his personal filing system takes some learning, because it only makes sense to him.
I'm sorry, if someone has to... Touch themselves just because of a certain thought that comes around that involves a kink and children... That guy's 100% p. As they say they're not sexually attracted to that type of situation, they're either lying, or they seriously have something messed up more.
He should be on a list
My guess is that last DM looked at an alignment chart meme and believed that only the strictest and most extreme examples counted. Except for chaotic neutral which in their mind means “lol I’m so random” and is just a way for a player to be inconsistent
The worst part about roleplaying as a hobby is that there is a murky mire of power tripping DMs and bad players ready to ruin sessions and turn away newcomers. Your first experiences in just about anything in life inform you if you want to keep doing it or not. It can be just as well be such a great and rewarding hobby though, one through which you can make a lot of new friends.
I probably wouldn't know around 15-20 people, some of them close friends, if I had never taken up a friend on his offer to introduce me to P&P back in 2012.
The further back you go the easier it was. D&D players were the outcast nerds when I started playing and we warmly welcomed anyone who wasn't actively bullying us. I won't say our games weren't absolute shitshows of murderhoboing and terrible decisions, but everyone had fun together
Someone, heck ANYONE, telling me “You need to fix this before I leave.” would be the quickest way to startle a laugh out of me. Like…ok? You really think the loss of your company is a punishment? 🤨
I once had someone block me on Facebook because he hated my firearms rules. He wasn't even in any of my games but I stated that guns in my fantasy games are only late Medieval handgonnes. No revolvers, lever actions, repeaters, etc. Just simple, primitive handgonnes that only fire once every other round. He was so angry that he blocked me.
An artificer subclass has magic cannons.
@@Michael-fd1gx to be honest, that is a class I am not a real fan of in most settings. Though I currently only run one 5e game only because we haven't transitioned them yet to C&C as I have my other ones.
It's crazy how people get mad what you put in your own campaign setting without even playing in it.
@@rootfish2671 I laugh all of the time because online everyone's all, "It's your game, do what you want." That is until you do something that they don't like or want, then they have a problem with it. I don't care what some rando thinks nor would I change the rules if he was in my games. It's how the world works and you're not getting a revolver. As I have said to several before, if revolvers existed than everyone would have one.
@@Doodle1776 i love how people act like they are the rpg police and going to arrest you for settings crimes. yeah that guy would crap his pants at my setting the human kingdom capital has magic powered lamp posts, magic mirror billboards and hand held magic mirrors like cell phones. Not To mention a ton of airships, flying brooms and magic carpets flying around for travel and trade. I also have goblins with higher level technology like black powder bombs and clockwork assassins.
First story i think i knew this dm don’t worry op we found out that he was beating his wife and beat him up so much he had to leave the army.
Should have alerted his command. AdminSep due to domestic violence would ruin his life.
God I hope this is true. Uh except the first part that’s terrible
@@arsenalxa4421 we did he was the one asked us if we wanted to beat him up.
Sometimes it's easy to forget how much of a small world it is when in the army
Third story: please get that guy on a watch registry. That is disturbing on so many levels
Last story: That DM is an idiot, and is forcing a LG character to actually be Lawful stupid. Paladins are a prime example of LG, and they accept payment for work (as that arrangement was effectively a contract and thus lawful) and are supposed to be tactical in combat, so negating both is against the alignment (both in general and as the system). That DM should just not run a game if he doesn't want players to play, or specify that he only runs CN campaigns, since he'd probably take away choices based on alignment for all the other alignments as well
I would definitely do a background check to see if that guy is on SO registery
Dude I tuned tf out during the third story and o got the worst case of whiplash when hearing about what that man was doing
Once played a game where we rolled on tables to see what alignment/class/race we got to make. It was interesting. Chaotic evil, Goblin Paladin. Even dark gods have champions.
Dark Paladins are an interesting narrative concept. Also one of my favorite YuGiOh cards from the mid 2000s.
I apologize for anyone prior military for the first horror story. We aren't all that bad.
THANK YOU FOR THE KITTY SECURITY IN THE THIRD STORY!! God bless this doggo, f*cking christ, I like fuzzy and cute character and my players have their liking too but.... My god...
The third story was a disaster. And, I have to employ the press X to doubt meme there. People online in particular will make excuses and use things, whether or not they apply to them towards that end.
As someone #ActuallyAutistic, having people use it as a Get Out of Consequences Free card drives me up the wall.
@@BlueTressym Same here, on both counts.
Lawful Good doesn't mean you are an immediate Saint at all times
I literally started choking on my tea when we got into the reasoning for why the guy liked balloons so much, I am in fucking SHAMBLES right now.
"He has a fetish for whimsical schoolchildren" HOLY FUCKING WHAT????
Story 1: I would've just left right then and there if the DM ripped up my character sheets
Story 2: "How dare you include guns in a fantasy setting you made that clearly said that guns were as common as Swords and Magic? You better change your setting before I leave!" Thats what the That Guy sounded like
Story 3: Title Alone made me skip straight to Story 4
Story 4: Ah...Lawful Stupid, where the Player(s) aren't allowed to do anything, cause someone want to be a buzz kill and dictate how things go
Had you watched Story 3 you wouldve been like, Story 3: Okay this guy needs to go and be turned into jail ASAP!
Dm: That's not what a lawful good character does! They do this instead!
If you're at the point where you dictate a player's actions like this, then why even let them make a character in the first place?
The Second Kitty cleansing was better.. i luv the relaxing Cats they are the Masters of Laziness and Relaxing with style and elegance.
1st: DM sucks but I feel friend was worse for enabling that stuff.
2nd: Players who don't read setting notes the DM sends are a burden on the game.
3rd: The guy is seriously weird. I would be worried he would be a danger to kids.
4th: Alignment is more trouble than it's worth and DM sucks.
THAT'S WHY WE CAN'T HAVE NICE THINGS. Animal crossing campaign sounds wholesome and chill, why do this
Sadly it can be summed up in two simple words, Rule #34. Well maybe one word if you add the numerals and 3 words if you type it out in full. Still it is to quote Irwin from The Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy, "That's messed up, Yo!"
Yeah that's why I have a problem with bronies, adults entering child spaces and sexualizing kids content
Pompous DM Story. That in no way will improve anyone's role playing. I have a feeling Army DM didn't do that kind of crap with other soldiers. They would have invited him to a dance real quick. I was in the Navy. And I've thrown fists for less than that.
thank you for the emergency kitty protocol
Alignment is not there so the DM can take control away from player characters. Alignment is meant to be a reflection of the sum of all the actions a character has taken. Players can take whatever actions they want, regardless of alignment. That's why alignment can change - it's supposed to reflect their actions, not guide them.
Also, has this DM never heard of Elysium? The Bestlands? Arboria? There are tons of Neutral Good and Chaotic Good celestials! Also, the current ruler of the first circle of the Nine Hells is a celestial - celestials can turn evil and change alignment just as much as anyone else! If this was a homebrew setting, it's a terrible one.
I...won't lie, I think the pompous DM was being a massive asshole, but I personally ain't keen on playing with people who use 5 different characters for their own character, it takes a lot of time and spotlight. It was a good idea actually, but more as a DMNPC, not a player, I feel. Granted, also don't know this person personally, so...neutral input. Friend was also a bit of a dick.
Fuck that Lawful/Stupid dm. "Did you have fun?" made me think of Blizzard's D4 panel "Don't you guys have phones?" ugh
While you do have a point, I think what solidifies the first DM as a dung beetle is the fact that in private he said that the op could play the character, but when the op is at first session he chooses to humiliate him in front of everyone by tearing up his character sheet in front of everyone like a cliche highschool movie bully. We can be almost sure that the stunt was preplanned with his friend who laughed and that the pair of dinguses wanted to humiliate the op just because. Maybe "friend" held a grudge against op due to some minor incident while he was dming. An adult would have denied the ops character in private and told him to prepare another.
@@bobwilliam2634 Oh definitely, the DM is a massive a-hole for what they did, no question there.
For the second story. For those who don't understand gunslingers in fantasy allow me to point you to the Dark Tower series a dark fantasy series written by Stephen King. It's definitely not your conventional fantasy but it is still fantasy and one of the most complex and amazing fantasy stories I've read in a long time. To say gunslingers don't belong in fantasy is gatekeeping and stupid anyway. Not all fantasy is knights and castles.
I'll never understand people who vehemently say that tech and fantasy don't mix. That's such a limited understanding of what fantasy can be and shows a lack of creativity on the part of those who say this. Just look at the Dwarves in Dragon Age, they have advanced technology because their race is incapable of possessing magic. Or Final Fantasy 7? There "magic" (materia) is developed through scientific innovation by utilizing the planets supernatural/spiritual life force. In fact most of the Final Fantasy games, even those with more stereotypical magic, still have advanced tech with an in world reason as to why.
Those who forget about the Dark Tower series have forgotten the face of their father.
@@marclytle644 Indeed. Long days and pleasant nights to you friend
Hell, there were even black powder firearms in many parts of medieval Europe, mostly in Eastern Europe using some armaments acquired from the Byzantine empire
Last story. I get the "Celestials must be Lawful good" part, though there are types of Celestials that range into chaotic. But his definition of LG is a bit extreme. He could possibly make a case that a celestial is the extremity of the alignment, but he would need to have that conversation before they start, and work out what things they can and cannot do without hampering celestial ideals.
8:15 "I've never played in a game with guns that wasn't a mess."
To be fair, it was the same for me. 2 games ended after a single session, one with the DM blocking everyone. The third game was kind of okay, except for me playing a monk with 13 dexterity and 12 wisdom.
In my experience, it usually comes from people trying homebrew firearms into a setting that didn't have them normally. Pathfinder 1e does have rules for firearms as well as differing rules that change based on how common they are. DnD relies on 3rd party or homebrew to add firearms and it leads to some... oddities.
@@patchmoulton5438yeah because d&d doesn't have firearm rules and why would you bring a knife to a gunfight?
13:10 we needed that. Badly. Thank you very much!
story 3: Wait, WHAT?! I'm gonna need at least 4 full ballads sung by lucky to get over that one.
So is anyone calling the cops on him or are we gonna wait until he spells it out during his underage SA trial that him being autistic is somehow a logical defense.....
Dear Gods below... Was gonna comment on the others but that third story took the cake and made the rest seem tame.
That's a predator in the making either way. Dude needs help and was likely lying or hasn't realized how bad it can get.
Though I have to add... I still hate alignments when they are super reinforced. People are more complex than that. As a general idea, it works, but I've seen people do things outside their alignment that works.
I forget what rpg I read this but alignment is a guide not a straight jacket
@@rootfish2671 I agree, but many DMs do use it as a cudgel and it doesn't seem to enhance the story in my experience. Why have something ya don't need? If it works for your table, cool, but I'd rather not give people ammo to lock others down.
@@PrideOfFantasy100 I skipped using alignment in my Pathfinder 2e setting because all of the characters are 1st time players and the book doesn't have a definition for each alignment just a vague definition of what good, evil, lawful, neutral and chaotic is which is fine if you're a veteran to these games but was too confusing to newbies so I just skipped it since all of the players are not playing evil characters anyway
@@rootfish2671 I tend to prefer just asking for some positive and negative traits that can help RP. Like maybe they are alcoholic or a habitual liar but charitable or very protective of their friends. Usually does the trick with newbies and vets alike and makes it easier to set up RP situations for me.
Why are so many people against guns in conventional fantasy settings? In actual Medieval times across the world, simple guns and cannons, while not exactly common, were well known enough to be found in many armies at the time. Also, its a fantasy setting, its up to you what goes into it, what level technology is available, and what the cultures and attitudes of the people there are, why not have a setting with common guns?
Most people have their technology at medieval settings before the invention of gun powder and are stuck in the medieval Europe/Tolkien type settings. Even AD&D had stats for an Aquebus, a black powder gun so it's not unheard of. In my setting I have goblins invent things like machines and bombs.
@@rootfish2671 My setting is a Renaissance/Early Modern "Davincipunk" world, where Repeating Crossbows and Firearms, War Machines like Wood-armored Tanks and Auto-carriages, Robot-like Automata such as Golems, Flying machines of all sorts, and magical telegram offices are commonplace, and the worlds analog to Venice is a main area for the setting, and is arguably the most influential city in that world.
@@MaxterandKiwiKing oh that's so cool! Nice
the main weapon of samurai was a rifle. people are weird about disliking guns, even though pulling out a gun is like a wizard shouting 'magic missile'. same shit.
Honestly, the Lawful Stupid story got me thinking how it's sort of wild that so many players have their "edgy first characters." Most of the first characters I've made in RPGs were pretty vanilla. Mostly because that's what DMs I played under would generally approve. A few even insisted that playing an elf made you some sort of "special snowflake" (don't even talk to them about half elves.) So I ended up playing nearly all humans for years. Funnily enough, one of the DMs that would hardly ever approve elves would brag about how his first character was a red dragon. No, he would not let you play as as dragon either.
TL:DR, I'm a bit jealous that I don't have a wacky, cringey first-time player character. That's a D&D trope that I missed out on.
They see edgy characters as powerful and want their own version of Drizzt or Batman or whatever. I think it's a lack of imagination and not thinking outside of the box. People need to realize there are plenty of kinds of rogues that aren't dark edgy brooding thieves in black leather. Robin hood could be considered a rogue, so can Catwoman.
I'm quite pleased with the triple kitty dose...though it did come at quite the cost...that was some high rolling on the psychic damage.
Yeah, the double dose of kitty palette cleanser was really needed
Last one: depending on the edition of d&d they were playing, the dm was not to far off from RAW. The paladin could not use poison, attack from surprise, had to defend the weak, and donated money paid because they were trying to make a classic knight in shining armor. You got all kinds of powers, free armor, free weapons, and a steed as a trade off, but you basically were an Arthurian knight bound by a strict moral code.
That having been said, you could always choose to break your code. Alignment had a exp penalty if you broke it, but you can start out a sir Gwen the Good and transition into "greedy Gwen" the theif.
Though this needed a discussion on what the alignments meant at the point of conflict. Generally, alignments are useful for a summery of a character's expected behavior, but it has to mean the same thing to everyone otherwise it just causes confusion.
"It's what my character would do" meet "It's what YOUR character would do."
What would Lawful good do? Watch the beginning of the Angel series where the only reason he charges people to help them is so they do not feel indebted to him. Not saying Angel is a lawful character just a good example of why a goody two shoes character would accept a reward.
what a dunce, that's a delirious understanding of alignment.
Story 2
Why can’t guns belong in fantasy? Gunpower and firearms existed for a very long time-and even then, DND isn’t historically accurate.
I love having a musketeer bard, rapier and musket or hand gun.
And then there is the artillerist and gunslinger subclasses.
Hell, I made a cowboy-themed ranger (because Rangers should be able to use firearms)
I believe Warhammer is also a fantasy game and guns are commonly used there, with the the greatest guns in the world usually being the Dwarf-crafted ones.
I'm running a flintlock fantasy game in 5e with slightly homebrewed guns (higher damage but long loading times) and it's going well so far. Guns are a mainstay of a number of historical periods that spawned plenty of great stories (golden age of piracy, the eighty years' war, the cavalier years, the French revolution, Napoleonic wars, the Victorian era, the wild west, mid-19th century European revolutions, etc...), it's rather arbitrary to exclude them from "high fantasy" just because Tolkien didn't include them.
Had a kobold cowboy artillerist artificer who dual wielded his pistols, one was his wand used to fire his regular spells, other pistol was his eldritch cannon, fired with the bonus action. Flavored him to have caster shells as spell slots (Outlaw Star vibes) that he recharges himself at appropriate rests.
Even AD&D Player's Handbook had stats for an aquebus, a black powder gun
And the most long Ryan campaign, that I am in, I am a Ranger, I shoot things all day, with a bow and arrow granted, but I shoot things, all day. However, there is a faction in our game that is run mostly by drill, and they have pistols, we just rolled it. Please pardon dictation for the errors.
**Smashes a big red-button as klaxons blare!**
Summon the Kitty Patrol!
Every day I thank our lord and savior, Azathoth, for never allowing me to have a TTRPG experience like that third story. I've played with weirdos, sure, but they were weirdos that I was friends with beforehand. But that story was more disturbing than Lovecraftian tale of cosmic horror.
lawful stupid story: dm, are YOU playing my character or am I? cause if you are playing my character I'll just go home.
That 3rd story sounded like the DM was on so much copium he dictated his own birth.
Okay, yeah, yeah...Number 3 is probably the most disturbing I've heard so far. Jesus Christ, Doge, how did you make it through reading that?
I need an adult and I'm already an adult.
I need an adultier adult.
Mr Good-boy Doge? I was wondering, how do you tell your black kitties apart? I know Nipsy had a nip from their ear, but what about the others?
I've been wondering that myself. I love cats as I have one myself. She's the queen.
@@violinfanatickamraz1403 I tend to love all animals but cats are waaayyy up there on the list. I have two. A little boy around 10 and an old tortie girl who is 20! And still pretty healthy though thin and more anti-social than she used to be. -shrugs- Still love them!
@@CallMeKes yeah. Sometimes I like animals way more than I like people except maybe my kids. Lol my cat is a calico. I love her patterns. Shes a good cat. Greets me when I wake and tucks me in.
Learn to Read Story. OMG! Mr. Annoying KNEW from the start what the game was going to be like. If Mr. Annoying was that set against playing in a game with guns he should have just said it wasn't for him and left it. Even later if he came to the realization he couldn't deal with it the mature thing to do is say sorry I'm just not having fun with the gun thing and leave.
You don't demand everyone change the game to fit what you like. And if you can't find a game you like, MAKE ONE! Become the DM and craft your world however you want.
This is the most doses of Kittium that Ive had in one sitting.
If it weren't for the cringe, and.. whatever that one story was, I might hav OD'd.
as soon as i heard about the balloon, i knew where it was going...
I would very much like to know the titles of the books the first story DM wrote, so I can go and give them all 1 star ratings.
The biggest thing I never understood about people from story 2, it's fantasy, it's legit meant to be unrealistic that's legitimately in the name
The third story: "Hello 911 that story there! Op and their group need help! DOGE DROP THE KITTY NUKE!"
Last story: holy crap, just SPEAK UP.
Can we please go back before, when the squeaking of rubber was just the kid nervously holding onto his balloon, before it was shattered by that!?
*That Guy:* "Remove guns from your setting or I'll leave!"
*DM on a college campus:* "200000 units are ready, with a million more well on the way."
I would tell my players before playing that guns are part of the setting, but imagine demanding a gm remove something from their setting just because you personally don't like it.
As an autistic player: I did get my special interest (penguins) involved in my TTRPGs by asking a GM if I could flavour the eagle totem barbarian as a penguin totem barbarian. When someone else needed a player for their campaign, they told me "You can play a penguin" (aarakokra with swim speed instead of flight speed) and I was in.
In a cyberpunk game I had giant mutant penguins with metal cyberware beaks in Antarctica because they were partly experimented on and exposed to nuclear radiation
10:17 guns absolutely add to Fantasy even if they arnt black powder they can still belong, for example have the firearm use magic instead, as it is i plan to DM someday and i plan on firearms being OP (as there are reasons why swords and maces were abandoned) but counterable (as things like Riot shields and bullet proof vests exist)
Have guns be magic items powered by runes that shoot out mini fireballs
I am 6'4, any raging kid on my table hit the door so fast that not even their divorced mothers would recognize them.
Wow, you're such a badass. I bet all of the tabletop larpers are super afraid of you.
That DM confused lawful good with idiotic stupid.
What’s funny is when you said we need another dose of kitty it immediately jumped into an ad for cat food
Story 4
I hate how folks can be anal about their alignment and treat people like robots.
Alignments, like The Code, are more like guidelines. As long as the Lawful good person is murderhoboing and raping, then I don’t see an issue.
Honestly it's lawful stupid in its purest form. The whole alignment lock bs is probably the weakest part of older editions, fortunately alot of DMs used them for just guidelines, but there are so many stories of DMs basically taking total control of PCs like this, especially if they were playing paladins, who HAD to always be lawful good, or they lose their powers
As long as you can justify it for "the greater good" and play like your character regrets doing stuff, you can play even murder hobos.
This is the second time I've had to use this example in response to a story like this in only a few days, which isn't a lot ect. ect.
But first responders are taught to to be aware of their own safety first because if they get hurt they can't help anyone. Could you imagine anything more lawful good than a paramedic coming to help someone? So in that example with the zombie, he can best protect the other character at range. He can actually do LESS to help by doing what the DM made him.
@@shadenox8164 even combat medics are trained to take cover when under fire and even return fire if the chance comes up. Can't help the wounded if you're taken out yourself
So note. If I’m lawful good and I see a party member in trouble then the suicidal intervention instead of playing to my character’s strength. Good to know
"It will be fun.". Usually preceding something that is anything but.
The emergency kitty protocol was deployed just in time
So many people in those stories need their teeth kicked in...
Uh no, there's very few times that's a correct response. Most of these is pointing out why what they're doing is stupid and walking away.
@@shadenox8164
I'm still for consequences.
He tore your character apart? Tear his dm notes apart. He protests? Tear him a new one.
I would have told the guy in the third story to get the hell out of here before I beat his ass. Sometimes violence is the answer
Iv'e always loved the "guns in fantasy are unrealistic" argument because China literally had proto-guns in the 900s annd actual guns in the 1200s; meanwhile in Europe guns were first historically described in the 1200s as well and cannons in the 1300s. Medieval worlds _without_ guns are actually _less_ realistic - it's just that most medieval firearms were expensive to make, tended to blow up, and difficult to use, so they weren't widespread.
If your world has fireworks having black powder guns isn't a stretch technology wise. In my campaign I have gnomes & goblins access to higher level of technology due to their inventions like bombs or clockwork soldiers
When it comes to my lawful characters, i look at their "wills and woes"
Basically your character traits with a bit of a stricter code. These can evolve through the story as well, but i will remind players of these traits when they do actions that go against them.
Alignment changes in my campaigns, so its not like I permanently lock them into doing what they wrote. Characters should evolve like real people do.
"It will help you become a better roleplayer" as OP literally has zero control over what they're doing. I guess their eye of "Better roleplay" is their roleplay. But they dont sound like better roleplayers than OP, who sat through all of that.
Story #3 _very_ much gave me a need to see Alice getting her cute fuzzy brown face kissed. And DM #4 was just dumb as a bag of hammers.
The first story: The character sounded awesome... But the DM turned the character into what he wanted the character to be...
So with the burning of the house, I think OP should have continued to observe what the DM found important to his story, and just burn it all down to the ground.
Learn about the specific deity and what would cause the deity to renounce the Paladinhood for example...
Just go all chaotic on him. I've seen players pull these kinds of stunts.
I know one friend who could come across as a douche, even as a DM... But he would never do such a thing. In fact, he'd offer to be a DM for that guy, And completely destroy him. (In fact, he has contacts in the publishing industry, and would work to destroy that guy's books.)
That last DM would not like me at all lol.
That last story pisses me off. I like playing Lawful Good, it can be fun. And to me, *nothing* OP did would be against the alignment. Not even looting the bodies, because the werewolves might have had something on them to point to where they came from.
If the DM ever says they're writing a book based on the world or campaign they're running thats the sign to gtfo because that means you aren't a player to them; you're an actor who needs to take better direction and stick to the script and that ain't D&D
Even worse, they can steal your character like that DM claimed to do. Really bad if your character is more to you than just something to play a single tabletop game with.
Oddly enough, that last story hits pretty close to home. That's kind of why i only play CN characters.
Man there was a lot of them in the doges words today
That guy in the third story, absolutely has kiddie porn on his computer and absolutely needs to be investigated
Last DM was a complete idiot. Granted, aligment stuff is not easy to handle at times. But lawful good doesn't mean, you have to sacrifice yourself to rescue another player from a ZOMBIE. And I wish to see him argue to an actual police officer, that they can not have a paycheck. It is "lawful good", not "lawful altruistic stupid".
I have been playing RPGs for more than 30 years, and while I have had my fair share of horror experiences, story #3 is by far worse than anything I have personally experienced. It may be because I have a decent ability to read people and I tend to stay away from certain types of people, but geeze that sounds like an awful experience. I have booted people from my table for less
That guy is a straight up monster out of a Stephen King novel
The progression of my thoughts: "Aw, that's kind of cute. Oh no, the balloon popped! How sad! Wait, what? WTF? NONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONO *radio static instead of b rainwaves*
Why do i have the feeling that the 'guy' in the third story has a police issued ankle tracker?
About the third story and a bit of a warning for people who can't take cursed knowledge:
Neurodivergent people can absolutely be pervs, it's not like they are mutually exclusive, it's just like any normal person but they tend to hide it for obvious reasons. In their case they might take an interest on whatever floats their boat and turn it into a fetish, in this case cutesy things, though that doesn't mean they have an interest on real children, they can separate sexual fiction from reality much like most people can tell the difference between fictional violence and IRL violence. There are whole ass communities centered around that even.
The thing is, those communities, like many others, draw some very strict lines so they don't gross out random people and most importantly, not commit a crime, which is why their opinion on MAPs, to put it very lightly, is not great.
Edging mid-session in secret without the consent of the other players was absolutely not okay in the slightest. Also, even if they're on the same boat, it is common courtesy not to shove fetishes onto other people's plate for obvious reasons.
In short, Balloon Boy might have not been a .pdf but he was indeed a creepo.
I think you misunderstood the op, they didn't say neurodivergent people can't be perverted. They said it's not an excuse or justification for perverted behavior.
@@RiveroftheWither OP did say "The person claimed to have autism and he was high functioning. Even blaming his actions and odd behavior on him having autism. I don't think people with neurodivergence are pervs. (I'm neurodivergent myself)".
He could be a poser for all I know but it is not unheard of as I explained.
Still, it is indeed not an excuse, my point is being neurodivergent and being a pervert are not mutually exclusive, and even if their line of thought was on the hornier side, it does not justify him from engaging in obsene behavior.
@@YouW00t I think OP meant that he wasn't saying that Neurodivergent = Perv by definition, as opposed to Neurodivergent people are NEVER pervs. In other words, he wasn't trying to say that being neurodivergent makes one a perv or that dude was a perv BECAUSE he was neurodivergent. I think it was just slightly wonky wording.
@@BlueTressym I see what you mean, that's fair and very correct.
Yeah you don't do your kink in public because strangers didn't consent to it
The argumentation in the last part I feel doesn't encapsulate lawful good very well. It's not just that resources are helpful in being good, it's that "good" doesn't mean "selfless" and "lawful" only implies following a code. Accepting agreed upon payment is - by definition - lawful. And if the deed was good, then it's something a lawful good character can do and most likely would, because almost no one wants to play an ascetic saint.
I always say that you can tell a lot about a DM by how they view Lawful good, or Paladins.
Lawful Good not shooting an arrow that might avoid injury to either player? That's ridiculous. If the character is playing an archer archetype character, then even as a lawful good character, he would defer to his most comfortable way of combat. And that's long range attacks.
Refusing payment? Nope. A Lawful good character would donate it himself. And besides, it doesn't mean he has to be a pauper. He does need to maintain weapons and armour, and make sure he has rations, and equipment in order to continue his duties.
I would not actually play by his rules. I would either a) malicious compliance, punishing every transgression I see, and going around to be a complete like a loon. Go all murderhobo on him. Get very literal. Or b) I would tell him that the "lawful" part is to his oath, and write down all his oaths he has sworn.
He doesn't understand that some people would feel offended if handing payment is declined. Hell, I would comment that I would take it, and would donate a portion of it myself. I would tell him that my character would understand that there is no guarantee that the money would end up in charitable hands.
Then there's another problem. Debts and favours. Many in both the underworld and with the nobility and church would see it that they have favours and debts to owe the person, and they will refuse to deny it.
If I were the player in the first story I would have told the DM to screw himself and walked out
Thank god for the emergency kitty protocol. Sheesh.