#dnd player rant

[venisonhare]

Currently going insane about my pc whos stuck in a toxic yuri situationship with a fiend. Ok so tldr, my paladin used to be a unicorn until she got stuck in a trap by some unknown entity, and for funsies, that entity made a deal that she'd save her life at the cost of co-inhabiting bodies. So now they're 2 immortals in the body of an eladrin trying to find out how to get back to normal. BUT. My paladin thinks she made a deal with a benevolent fey, not a fiend so she considers her, her most precious companion, half of her heart and soul. Oh this is going to be excruciating during the campaign

[operationslipperypuppet]

who runs a one-shot at first level? it’s a one-shot. let me do more than one thing before needing to take a nap. and don’t send options for cool subclasses in the setting you’re choosing if some people won’t even have access to that because they’d get it at level 3!

[pagesofkenna]

i wanted to make a post about a thing but the more i think about it the more i want to say and it's just going to end up being a big ramble essay, so instead i'll just give the thesis statement, thusly:

as the #1 Ratgrinders Apologist (self-appointed), of course they're the final boss fight to the death. i expected nothing less and the people trying to make discourse about it are ignoring the entire context of this being a Dungeons and Dragons game

[quadrantadvisor]

I'm trying so hard not to be a hater but the more I learn about other ttrpgs the more the way that people talk about dnd annoys me

[grabby-hands-on-dragon-hoard]

As a DM, my players won’t be caught dead trusting narratively pertinent NPCs.

But fucking Tuck? The random fisherman I made up who caught a shark? They love him.

They straight up bully my narrative npcs, but everyone else? Cool.

[bodbdearg]

God. I've been looking into a few people's advice on how best to play a more defensive fighter in dnd but in doing so I have to keep seeing the most stupid takes from people who don't know how dnd works. Anyone who knows the basics of dnd would be able to tell the OP of the following post that their DM is weird, but the DM's mindset is one I've seen more than a few times

Yes, PAM + sentinel is an optimal way to play fighter. Gloomstalker ranger with a fighter dip and the archery fighting style and the sharpshooter feat will work super nice but might seem to some people like a LOT of stuff. But people complaining they're broken are just??? Martials might excel in early levels but they drop off SO quickly, and unless you're making a five class frankenstein monster (which people usually only talk about when theorycrafting exclusively and most people would never try to play their 1000+ damage nova builds in an actual campaign) there is NEVER going to be a martial so optimised that it even scratches the surface of what a normal ass wizard can do. If you as a DM think builds like these feat combos are broken then dnd probably isn't the system you're looking for and you should be playing something more gritty! Or at the very least you should be banning all spellcasters seeing as how basic battlefield control is apparently? too much??

Like idk. I feel like I see this mindset that 'optimising' by like... increasing the main stat you use and taking a feat that suits the playstyle you want is? bad? When martials are already at a giant disadvantage both damage and strategy wise unless you're doing 5 combats a day or something (which for old school dnd was the norm but is DEFINITELY not the case for modern dnd). Maybe if you have a problem with people taking the same feat options all the time your real problem is with the game that necessitates taking those feats if you want to stay relevant in the late game or play a non-damage focused character...

[blood-bagz]

man i'm rearing up to FINALLY run curse of Strahd with a group of friends and I just,,, can not handle my friend's horniness LMAO It's not just the horniness though She's very insistent and believes that if she fucks the guy she'll get immunity to his bullshit I'm very close to just grappling her and telling her he's white cazador to get her to understand that this guy is a loon who is not going to fall head over heels for her pc and make her his vampyr queen (and even if he did that's... not a good fate.) He's too busy lusting after his dead not-wife anyways

[fallenoftheromaempire]

Some dnd pet pieve because i feel like a hater tonight so what about it?

Players Petpeeve:

People that make character that don't fit the world/vibe of the campaign as a joke ( the classic "I'm playing a goblin named fart ahah" and it's a gothic campaign.)

People that show up to the first session without even having finished their character sheet/backstory(ofc this doesn't apply on session 0)

People that are obsessed with mechanics and nothing else

People that build their character to be as op as possible (and sometimes don't even discuss it with the dm just using hombrew without permission)

People that constantly contest the dm, like shut the fuck up (I'm not a dm btw)

People that put 0 effort in their character back story/development and are barely present in rp and only come alive during combat. Like go play a videogame or something.

People that make everything sexual. Not like the bard that flirt with everyone, like they constantly make gross comments about other characters or npcs.

People that call off last second without warning. Like if ther is even the smallest chance that i won't make It I'm warning everyone days in advance. Be respectful of other's time. (unless is an emergency)

Players that use ai generated images for their characters fc. Fuck you.

People that make their character do fuck all or go out of their way to make the stupidest decisions possible making everything harder for everyone else. I hate you so much.

People that keep talking about their character and their back story (this simply because i want to learn about the character in game and properly react to it without having previous knowledge. I just think it makes things more engaging)

DMs Petpeeve:

Dms that like the sound of their voice a little too much and launch in these long ass monolohues or cut of players as they are speaking but get mad if they get cut off. I love a monolog but dude it's been 15 minutes wrap it up

Dms that cancel last second without warning

Dms that invite people to join without asking the rest of the party first. (especially if we are like deep in the campaign, like we don't need more players)

Dms that act like it's them a against you and just look forward to cause pain for your character (good for character development but like please slow down it's overwhelming)

Dms that keep around that one toxic player instead of kicking him out the table despite fighting with them all the time.

Dms that when they are the player, constantly protest "That's not how i do it" yeah well, this is not your campaign nor your table. Get used to it and adapt.

Dms that allow all the above players mentioned. Like i wish they told them no.

Dms that keep no safety measures or safewords and don't stop even when the players speak up about how they are uncomfortable

Dms that spend an entire hour talking about their business. And i don't mean having a conversation, like i mean they just talk about themselves without ever asking you how you are doing for a whole hour while you just want to play. Like man I'm happy to listen but at least choose a better moment. I'm not in the head space for this and clearly neither are you.

Dms that waste a lot of time looking for the perfect image to use for npc. Like just describe it.

On that note, dms that use ai images. Fuck you.

What are your pet pieve? Let me know in the tags or notes

[jonathanrook]

i'm sorry i know but the marmora trials kinda suck :/

[jo-gakky]

WEKJFNKWJEFNKWJFNWKEFJ MY BAD FOR THE RADIO SILENCE !!! Here, have a quick outfit thing for my HS sona(Its for plot i swear-)

[dead-by-tbr]

It's a game store for fucks sake!! How else would a child with wild imagination (perfect for dnd, mind you) would learn in a safe place?!

I used to go weekly to our local game store's Adventures League, where there is a WIDE age range. From elementary school kids to original 70s/80s DnD players. It was the safest place I felt to game as a 20-something female who is scared of a large majority of male nerds. Being outnumbered by males in a store like that is very anxiety inducing, but I never wanted anyone to feel left out. Especially the kids and other females who were there. I would try my hardest to be a "nerd translator" because getting 'yelled' at in the middle of combat to figure out your fantasy math rocks apart from each other or why that skill has a modifier or not is FUCKING STRESSFUL. And extremely intimidating for newbies of any kind.

In summary, being kind to beginners of whatever age is the best way to go. Players are supposed to be a team in dnd. Yes, there are moments when a single character takes center stage, but that shouldn't be the players's priority. Wanting to learn how to play a great game but being gatekept because you're a kid is fucked up. Those players should figure out a "no kids allowed" gametime. A game store should allow all ages because most games are great for all ages. Most board games and tabletop are great for families. Dnd isn't about gore or seduction; it's about teamwork and problem solving in creative ways to get to the goal together. Celebrating the wins and the fails together.

Some D&D party is out there playing the coolest campaign ever.

[liedownquisition]

Who's up dooming they lesbians.

[maplesyrizzup]

I don't know how much into my campaign my dnd players are anymore. I understand everyone has got shit going on and that's not what is bumming me out. Its the fact that every session for the past few months I've had at least 1 to 2 players ask the day of how important it is for their character to be there. With the rate of this it just feels like they don't want to be there. I don't really know how to make it more engaging. Its fine if they wanna to leave or stay home, I don't want to make it seem like their opinions, health, feelings don't matter to me, cause they do

[macrocosmus]

Alrighty so there's too many replies for me to go through all of them so I'm just gonna reply to what I've seen so far and then maybe mute notifs on this for a while.

1. Those of you have been using your nonTTRPG OCs or mixing in a few oneshot characters or characters you were invested in even if the campaign only lasted 3 sessions... I love your defiance, good on you.

1a. To the person who said that they always DM and so their party would have all the villains they've used, including Tiamat. You're the best DM reply to this post. Rock on.

2. Those of you who say "Well, I have one character who fits that qualification, so party of one" you have my sympathy and I hope you get to play more!

3. To all the folks who have said something along the lines of "character A would be the exact kind of found family character B needs!" or some other variant of their characters forming a found family... you're correct. Good job, you're doing it right.

4. To all the folks who have said something along the lines of their characters becoming romantic, or sexual, or some secret similar thing, especially the person who described their party as a lesbian orgy... you're correct. Good job, you're doing it right.

5. To all the folks who enthusiastically claim their characters would be at each other's throats in an instant, who would end up in the messiest, most explosive or implosive party you've ever seen. Parties that would result in death before the antagonist first showed up? ... You're correct. Good job, you're doing it right.

and 6! To all the "forever DMs" out there. You're not a forever DM, you have forever players. Ask them if you didn't run the game, would there be a game to play? If no... that's fucking sad. One of them needs to give you a damn break. You can't be expected to make dinner every night forever, so why DM forever?

Show your players Matt Colville's Running the Game series, just the first five episodes. Running the game can be easy! and fun! Tear down their excuses!

Don't know the rules well enough? I know a guy who played something like Runequest back in the early 90s with one out of three corebooks for years and had loads of fun. You don't have to know the rules, focus on fun, learn the rules as you go, most of the systems out there that are as complex as DnD? No one can hold the entire corpus of the rules in their brains anyway.

Not creative enough? The plot of three books series and like four video games are all happening in my campaign setting in the background because I don't want to come up with my own plots. Touhou 6 could just start happening in my campaign setting and no one would care, they'd be hyped to fight a vampire! Take things you like and put them in your game! That's before we even start running modules.

Don't feel good at roleplaying? so many times in my games that I run, I will forgo doing the voice and just say "this character expresses this idea with this emotion" and that's still roleplaying and people like it just fine. I sometimes have to say to my players, fellow players or who im running for, that "I'm going to embarrass myself" and then just recklessly throw myself at a silly voice to call it roleplay, because I'm having fun with it, and sometimes saying that I'm making a fool of myself is enough to get myself in the headspace to roleplay without shame, even if I don't think I'm doing it well. Sometimes I have to pause and say "how would this character reply to that..." or just say "I'm not sure how my character would word this, but I would word it like this" ... roleplaying is just pushing the character around the stage, and the cost of doing it a bit wrong? is not really anything bad!

Honestly the only reason I find as valid for someone not running TTRPGs is that they simply don't want to, which is unfathomable to me as someone who was nashing my teeth to try to throw myself behind the screen and get to it, to demystify it, to crash that gate no matter how gatekept it is... and I wanna keep smashing that gate, to let as many people into the GM chair as possible, because if you want to run but don't feel able, that's the worst thing I can imagine in this hobby, outside of things that are bad regardless of if they happen in or out of the hobby. Also more GMs is good for the health of the hobby in general. I want as many people to get behind the screen and say "wait, that's it? what was all the hype about" because I really think that people overhype how hard running a game is.

I ask my players to help me plan when game will be, because acting as producer for my game in addition to writer and director is really hard for me, but we work as a group, find a date and time, and then the game is set and we start playing every week or every other week as we can, because I was about to offload the stuff I find really difficult onto my players, they helped me. You can do the same with your group, with whatever challenges you.

My real real advice for DMs is like, treat your players how you would want to be treated, let them come up with solutions you wouldn't have, ask them to respect you the same way you would respect a DM, talk about expectations, solve your disagreements by talking them out respectfully, know how to interact with other people on a basic level because this is a social game, don't be afraid to speak your mind if something bothers you... uh... yeah. Basic stuff probably.

Anyway I went on for a while on that so uh... thanks for reading!

And I mean characters that you've put time into, not ones for oneshots or campaigns that sputtered out. Ones that you've had for a few levels, or whatever system equivalent you have.

[richardsphere]

DND DM TIP: Variant Rule Disclosure

If you're DM-ing a campaign, remember it doesnt matter if its in the DMG. Variant rules need to be disclosed in session 0 if you intend to use them in the game. If you forget that Feats are a variant rule, thats fine, most people understand them and at least this variant rule is also in the PHB. But if you spring indefinite fucking madness on players without telling them its even a risk they face in your campaign you can eat my ass.

This is also about strategic things like "hey players, im gonna use the generic item rules". So that players know you can just use shatter to break a wall for an escape. As well as "The Disarm action exists" so a non-battlemaster can strategically disarm an enemy.

Telling your players about the variant rules you intend to use means they're informed of the risks AND aware of the tools they have available.

Heck, it doesnt even have to be a variant rule. If its exclusively in the DMG and not in the PHB (IE: Identify doesnt show curses. Copying Spell Scrolls into a spellbook requires an Arcana Check) you need to tell your players if it is remotely relevant to the campaign. Because players dont read the DMG (hence the name) --- Sorry if this is more angry then my usual posts but i am PISSED at my DM, who just kicked me out of a game for venting my frustrations on not being warned of a rarely-used variant rule that completely rewrote my characters personality without even a saving throw against it.

Indefinite madness is worse then death as conditions go. If my character dies, i roll up a new character of my choice with a personality and backstory I decide for myself If my character suffers madness-induced loss of their fundamental identity (IE: "I'm a humble, self-deprecating druid", Roll a 60 on the Indefinite table "i am the greatest, smartest, bestest and mary-est of sues"), I am forced to roleplay a new character determined entirely by a random diceroll. A new character which may be entirely at odds with anything and everything that I find fun to play in a TTRPG.

And indefinite madness can only be cured by a 5th level spell. That means, if you get it at a low level you are stuck until your party gets a 9th level caster. --- Just because its in the DMG, doesnt give you the right to suprise your players with it.

[james-march]

I just want to add that it seems lost to quite a few DMs and players alike that D&D isn't some giant Player VS DM smackdown and that the purpose of the game isn't to "defeat the DM" or "defeat the Players". Like, in-game consequences are a thing and I think they should be a thing, but if you're as a DM crafting some elaborate in-game vengeance for a player that did something, that YOU as THE DM OF THE GAME allowed them to do in-game is just.... It's baffling. Like it's YOUR game. If the players are doing something that "doesn't fly at your table" then just fucking talk to them about it. Just don't let them do the Thing that is seemingly or actually causing harm to the game. D&D should be fun! For everyone! DMs punishing players in-game for their actions is just not the way to go. I CAN understand from a balance standpoint how certain items could "ruin" campaigns, but just don't fucking use those items! Just make them Not Available or talk to your players beforehand and make sure you're all on the same page?? Like damn, D&D is a social game so be more social with your players.

And as a small addendum, don't run high level games if you're not prepared for the shenanigans and incredibly powerful feats/abilities/items/combos of these that come with the higher levels. For me, high level is 12+ but some say it's 15+ and I'd argue beginner DMs would feel 6+ is a high level game. It depends. Anyway, communicate with your players.

why is all D&D Content™ like this. what if we all played fun games with people we like and respect and had a nice time