| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 17 Oct 2010 : 10:18:24
Sometimes they do completely unexpected, illogical, surprising things. Sometimes they stubbornly insist on railroading the DM, in plain defiance of all that is reasonable. Well, they're adventurers and so they're ambitiously unreasonable by definition; and besides, as often as not things can be salvaged or even turn out more interesting than planned.
But, what openly frustrates (and secretly amuses) me most is when my players simply flabbergast me with their sheer senseless stupidity.
(players are attempting to rob a temple of Mask; they have set off many traps and are currently stuck in a sealed room, in the center of the room is a metal pedestal with a piece of trapped bait)
First player (F/T): "I'll grab the big [golfball-sized] glowing pearl off the pedestal."
Other players (shouting): "No! No! No! Don't - it's another lightning trap! That's the third eye! Remember the warning from the riddle!"
DM (handsome me): "So ... the rest of the party obviously recommends you don't touch the pearl because it might be another lightning trap. What are you gonna do?"
First player: "Well the last lightning trap only killed two of us, right? They were wimps anyways, and besides, we're mostly healed now. So I'm gonna grab the pearl. It's gotta be worth, like, easily 500GP, right?"
DM (carefully neutral): "You can't properly appraise the pearl without removing it, but it definitely looks very valuable. Will anyone try to stop him?"
Other players: "I back against the wall, behind my shield! - I cast Globe of Invulnerability on myself - I'm going to read my Protection from Traps scroll - I'm going to search for another way out of the room."
First player: "Hey! I said I was grabbing the pearl first!"
(players bicker, initiative dice are rolled, first player wins)
First player: "Awesome! Okay, I grab the pearl with both hands! Before they all try to waste their spells and stuff."
DM: "Okay ... just like last time, a massive forked blast of red chain lightning emits from the pedestal..."
(lots of swearing and dice rolling, everybody takes lots of damage, somebody dies, players bicker again)
First player: "Okay, I reach for the pearl again."
Other players (enraged): "Huh, WTF??? You're gonna kill us all! It's obviously trapped, you moron!"
First player: "Yeah, but now it's gone off. I want that pearl."
DM (wincing): "Are you really sure you want to touch the pearl again? Another blast could kill everybody ... what do the rest of you do?"
(other players protest first player's intended action vehemently but choose to act cowardly again, more bickering, more initiative dice are rolled, first player wins again)
First player: "I'll use both hands. Even if the trap explodes again, I wanna yank that pearl off."
DM (apologetically): "Ah, well okay ... once again, a massive forked blast of red chain lightning emits from the pedestal..."
(lots more swearing and dice rolling, everybody takes lots of damage, somebody else dies, players bicker again)
First player: "Dammit! I want that pearl! I'm reaching for it again!"
DM (merciful): "Time Out. Look OOC, you know the pedestal has a magic trap, right? I'm telling you right now that it does. I'll let you roll to Detect Traps with 100% success this time. One more blast will kill you all - it's suicide, two of you are already dying and the rest have a combined total of about 10 hit points left."
First player: "Yeah, maybe. But I'm still reaching for the pearl. It's gotta run out of charges eventually."
 |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Jakuta Khan |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 19:46:15
we had a guy once, playing a woodelf-character with str 19 and con 18.
he described him as "slender aand agile, but well trained" it still makes me laugh thinking of it, much better yet was the fact, that this char was literally a bad copy of drizz't do urden since he also had an onyx figure, fought with two scmitars, but the best was similar as the minotaur, he used abow adjusted for str 19.
aahh, sometimes i miss the good old times really, no matter how silly they sometimes were.
same guy was DM, and we had gaming ngiths, with him as dm and me and a friend as players. me fighter level 7-9 and him illusionist level 6-9 over the time.
in one session i recall as wandering monsters, a days march out of silvery moon:
morning: we wake up and see a death knioght roaming the countryside...
mid-day: a red dragon, mature adult or bigger ( ok, this is justifiable.... where north and close to the spine of the world....)
late-afternoon: A PAIR OF MARILITHS CAMPING NEAR A CAVE!!!!!!!
funny enoughthough, that back then my fighter always anted to charge into all opportunities like a pissed off pitbull. the illusionist gave up on the mariliths, and they cleanly chopped my head off with their vorpal blades....
char got raised later, but will never forget....
in one session |
| dwarvenranger |
Posted - 10 Dec 2011 : 13:47:18
They don't love the Realms as much as I do. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 08 Oct 2011 : 00:42:05
Hmmm, well I've been DM for years and my mob of foolish victims friendly players still haven't lynched me. |
| WizardsHerb |
Posted - 08 Oct 2011 : 00:01:48
It's why I haven't played for years. I've always thought it's a great shame that I couldn't find a stable group, since there's so much to tabletop roleplaying that is just amazing. The experience of being in a story-focused group with a great dynamic with each other and a riveting GM with a great story to lead them through... It's a thing that I'm worried might slowly die out without the right boost. Something like that should never die out. |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 07 Oct 2011 : 23:35:13
Urk. That was me throwing up in my mouth a little. You poor, poor man. Sounds like you've had some horrible DM's/players in your group(s). I've had a few stinkers in mine as well, so I sympathize. |
| WizardsHerb |
Posted - 07 Oct 2011 : 01:26:45
I've had few games of tabletop D&D (and some other tabletop games), but my goodness, I've had some horrible experiences.
A player who demanded to play a half-black dragon rogue to an otherwise low powered group (a dumb fighter and an even-spread cleric), and threatened the GM with a knife when his character received a critical hit.
I quote, "No, it doesn't [crit me], because if it did I'd knife you."
That GM spending half of the second play session showing off his PC from another campaign (our guide) which was a psionic were-tiger monk/sorcerer with a githyanki silver sword.
A (different) GM who insisted my (Good-aligned) Rogue would be inclined to rob a village in which the folks had, that moment, fled in terror from imagined vampires and curses.
That GM also refusing enquiry on tasting a river of blood because I asked "does it taste like dye?" rather than "does it taste like blood?", arguing that I wouldn't know what dye tastes like.
And then I've had the classics of another player insisting on playing a higher level character with perfect stats because he rolled them in another group. Which makes sense. Also tended to retcon other players' actions for them. Oh, and when running games, having players who insist they want to play but skipping on all of the sessions after the first two or three.
And I just remembered the one player who really drove me nuts when GMing, before the game had even started. Trying to organize my first game of M&M, and said player being really enthusiastic to play... as "Kenny McTickle", who has a magic kilt from which he can withdraw any item imaginable, including a superserum which he used to gain superpowers. He wouldn't give up the joke, so I wouldn't let him play. >:( |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 05 Oct 2011 : 20:45:36
I fondly recall Knoxx, the Minotaur. He actually started off as a slave and ended up never choosing any weapons at all beyond the manacles and chains he "symbolically" wore on both wrists. Not as glorious as a ballista-bow or siege-mace, but still capable of surprising damage. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 05 Oct 2011 : 15:50:08
quote:
Originally posted by Nilus Reynard
10+ years back we had a guy in our gaming group who played a minotaur barbarian. He had all kinds of ridiculous weapons that he chose for the character, but the worst (and most amusing) was a great bow that he fired Ballista bolts from. All of us tried to explain to him that this is physically impossible, but he would hear none of it. We eventually gave him a an example of why it wouldn't work through a small demonstration: We tried to shoot a broomstick using a youths target bow. Of course it didn't work. So he ditched that idea, and chose something even more stupid. He wanted to try using a battering ram as a two-handed mace, again we tried to explain that this wouldn't work as minotaurs just aren't that big. But he argued about it until we just gave up.
We eventually ended up killing off his character & me being the priest in the group I refused to raise him. He just insisted that he would create another character like the previous. He was told that if he couldn't act somewhat normally, he wasn't wanted around for the gaming nights as we were tired of the stupidity. Every so often the topic of it comes up & even he looks back and shakes his head about it.
My 2E minotaur preferred fighting with a bastard sword in one hand, and sometimes a club or axe in the other. Never tried anything more exotic than a bow special made to allow him to get his strength bonus -- which, due to a crit on a called shot, some creativity on my part, and a bad call on the part of an inexperienced DM, allowed my character to kill a full-grown T-rex with one shot!
The bad call on the DM's part was the strength of some "very powerful poison" that had been found on a prior adventure. My minotaur tied a vial of this poison to an arrow, and fired it right into the T-rex's mouth. It keeled over dead, and our poor DM almost fell over in shock! |
| Artemas Entreri |
Posted - 05 Oct 2011 : 14:13:28
quote:
Originally posted by Nilus Reynard
10+ years back we had a guy in our gaming group who played a minotaur barbarian. He had all kinds of ridiculous weapons that he chose for the character, but the worst (and most amusing) was a great bow that he fired Ballista bolts from. All of us tried to explain to him that this is physically impossible, but he would hear none of it. We eventually gave him a an example of why it wouldn't work through a small demonstration: We tried to shoot a broomstick using a youths target bow. Of course it didn't work. So he ditched that idea, and chose something even more stupid. He wanted to try using a battering ram as a two-handed mace, again we tried to explain that this wouldn't work as minotaurs just aren't that big. But he argued about it until we just gave up.
We eventually ended up killing off his character & me being the priest in the group I refused to raise him. He just insisted that he would create another character like the previous. He was told that if he couldn't act somewhat normally, he wasn't wanted around for the gaming nights as we were tired of the stupidity. Every so often the topic of it comes up & even he looks back and shakes his head about it.
Lol, good stuff. I had a great minotaur character once but never tried anything lame like that. He sure could dish out some damage though. Pit-fighting was especially fun  |
| Nilus Reynard |
Posted - 05 Oct 2011 : 12:46:41
10+ years back we had a guy in our gaming group who played a minotaur barbarian. He had all kinds of ridiculous weapons that he chose for the character, but the worst (and most amusing) was a great bow that he fired Ballista bolts from. All of us tried to explain to him that this is physically impossible, but he would hear none of it. We eventually gave him a an example of why it wouldn't work through a small demonstration: We tried to shoot a broomstick using a youths target bow. Of course it didn't work. So he ditched that idea, and chose something even more stupid. He wanted to try using a battering ram as a two-handed mace, again we tried to explain that this wouldn't work as minotaurs just aren't that big. But he argued about it until we just gave up.
We eventually ended up killing off his character & me being the priest in the group I refused to raise him. He just insisted that he would create another character like the previous. He was told that if he couldn't act somewhat normally, he wasn't wanted around for the gaming nights as we were tired of the stupidity. Every so often the topic of it comes up & even he looks back and shakes his head about it. |
| Gouf |
Posted - 03 Aug 2011 : 21:05:19
quote:
Originally posted by Arik
I really, really hate having to dumb things down or install delaying tactics with improvised distractions/complications to occupy the rest of the group for a wasted day, or worse, having to arbitrarily role play the missing player's character through critical (and often catastrophically unpopular) decisions which are categorically not mine to make.
And that is exactly what I hate to do. If somebody misses 1 session, sure we (random other player) will auto pilot their character through the session, giving respect to not break the character by doing things the missing player wouldn't do.
But if they miss multiple sequential sessions, I bench them by having the character get called away, return to the keep, etc. and for fit all XP for that session. (Divided only by the players that are actually there.)
It's unfair to the other 4 players to sandbag them because 1 person doesn't show up. So I've just made sure to not hang any major plot points on that person's character. And reward the PC's that are there for having to think around not having party member 'X' with them.
It just ticked me that the person was upset that they were so far out of the story loop and didn't get all the in jokes and plot references they had missed. My reply was, "Show up. Problem solved." |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 03 Aug 2011 : 19:43:23
My problem is similar ... particular players have a penchant for showing 19/20 times, a respectable attendance record in most circles. After all it's a hobby, not a military formation, and we're all permitted an off-day from time to time.
But of course that one session the player is a no-show invariably happens to be the all-important fulcrum session which they really shouldn't miss for any reason whatsoever. I really, really hate having to dumb things down or install delaying tactics with improvised distractions/complications to occupy the rest of the group for a wasted day, or worse, having to arbitrarily role play the missing player's character through critical (and often catastrophically unpopular) decisions which are categorically not mine to make. |
| Gouf |
Posted - 03 Aug 2011 : 18:03:13
A player who shows up 1 out of every 4 gaming sessions and then complain that the story arc doesn't have enough personal involvement centering around their character.
We play 1 day a month for 10-12 hours. If he wants to place a higher priority on his other hobby interests that's fine, but don't complain the story doesn't revolve around your character when you only show up 25% of the time.
*Gets off the soap box* |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 29 Jun 2011 : 00:04:40
I'd rule that they do indeed know where the enemy is. Unless they are small or less in size, they will be taking up most if not all of that square anyway, so missing by smell would be really hard. Dogs are known to sniff out the exact location of drugs, or missing persons, or anything else they are given the scent of, so even if they can't see it, they still know where it is. It's why dogs are so often used in search and rescue missions- they can literally sniff out a person under a ton of debris or snow, and dig straight to them. I dot't think a little darkness will deter that. (And since invis won't prevent you from making sounds, they can hone in on that, too, so the chance of missing will be next to zero.) |
| Diffan |
Posted - 25 Jun 2011 : 04:14:21
Basically the rules on attacking invisble individuals is pretty shoddy using 3E. In your instance, the target is sniffed out and the player would know what square they are in. But this just negates the randomness of possibly attacking an empty square. They would still suffer the %50 chance miss, but know what square they're targeting. That ability alone is pretty impressive for your "supposed" to roll randomly in and hope you pick the right square. And while various ways is done to accomplish this, I make them roll a d10, and reroll all 1's. 2, 3, 4 is the top row; 5, 6, 7 is the middle row; and 8, 9, 10 is the bottom row.
|
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 25 Jun 2011 : 02:42:25
That, and a scent will generally lead to the creature's EXACT current location- anyone who has ever watched a cat or dog tracking something in the grass will understand this. I've watched my mom's dog dig up moles just by sniffing them out. And she can smell them with almost pin-point accuracy. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 22 Jun 2011 : 11:55:20
I say the scent ability would trump invisibility. Invisibility trumps only one sense -- it doesn't make anyone inaudible or intangible or anything. |
| Jorin Embersmith |
Posted - 21 Jun 2011 : 18:03:17
Here's a doozy for you!
The same player who made the super-cleric-of-turning always chooses pets, companions and so on based on special abilities. (bat familiar for blindsight, yadda yadda)...
Now, they were fighting in a dead-magic zone, and the shadow-weave using bad girl killed the lights.
The Druid's pet cat has scent. So, it's pitch black, The evil priestess of Shar is hurling shadow weave spells, and he has the cat track her by scent.
My argument was this. The exact wording of the scent is "..pinpoints the sources location". To me this means the 5 foot square in which the priestess was standing. Of course, players made an uproar over this, saying that it's exactly the same as seeing it with normal vision. I say that it the same as pinpointing an invisible character...you know the place where he is, but you STILL suffer miss chance.
Does anyone know if there are any other rules about scent vs. invisibility or scent vs. being blinded? What do the great lorekeepers of Candlekeep say?
|
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 09 May 2011 : 06:24:20
There's that, too. |
| ChieftainTwilight |
Posted - 02 May 2011 : 07:04:20
I was mainly thinking about the idea that... "ok, now we've got a group that no longer has ANY of the original party members, finishing the quest that was started by a completely different group of people... and sooner or later, every single one of us will be replaced as well, and they'll keep doing the same quest, from where WE left off."
... where would these folks get the motivation? I mean, yeh it's not out of the question that they'd just go along with the same quest, but is't it likely that someone would pipe up and say "ya know, why do we care? clearly the first group didn't, they gave up already." |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 02 May 2011 : 01:33:06
Precisely. My campaigns almost always have solid quests, that usually extend into several linked adventures, so having PC's cycle in and out makes things harder for me, and less fun for the group when they have to wait for the new PC to be built or to have a decent insertion point. |
| ChieftainTwilight |
Posted - 30 Apr 2011 : 06:24:55
heh. it can be kinda funny when you play a sandbox game, or one where everyone's split up to do their own thing. but in a game where there's a solid quest it doesn't make sense for the characters pursuing aforementioned quest to be cycled in and out over and over inconsistantly. |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 30 Apr 2011 : 04:42:33
Gripe all you want. I had a player who kept changing his PC just about every session. It got so annoying that I finally told the group that they had to stick with current characters until they died or were otherwise removed from the game legitimately. |
| ChieftainTwilight |
Posted - 30 Apr 2011 : 03:13:44
can I gripe about alleged players who claim they want to play in my game but who keep skipping out every time they have a day off or get off of work?
they don't answer their phone calls, and they get bitchy about all the questions for planning and/or character discussion! what the hell did they think was required for getting them to JOIN AN ONGOING CAMPAIGN!?
good gods! and one of them keeps changing his character concept over and over! it's fine, realy, but he's saying his reason is because he's looking for something "unique" that nobody's thought of before.... this woul be greatbut for two reasons.
1.) he keeps thinking up pretty cliche archetypes, alot of which are BLATANTLY based on fictional characters from all over.
and 2.) he won't be satisfied until he stumps me, which has two problems of it's own.
2a.) I won't be able to help him create the character in the first place if he "stumps" me, and he doesn't know how to create a character.
and 2b.) my SPECIALTY is creating unique, interesting, out-of-the-box character concepts and statting them out. he's not going tostump me, it's impossible. even if he comes up with a concept I've never seen before, I'll have it form itself in my mind almost instantly. |
| ChieftainTwilight |
Posted - 30 Apr 2011 : 03:01:35
oh yeh. I'd never think of subjecting my players to that pitiful number... even if they were to just start off as homely peasantry I'd give them 25 points. |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 30 Apr 2011 : 02:48:09
That must be REALLY "low-powered". I've yet to see a successful PC with stats based that low. |
| ChieftainTwilight |
Posted - 30 Apr 2011 : 02:27:23
28 was for high-powered games. 32 was for REALY high-powered games. 25 is standard. I think 18 was for low-powered games. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 29 Apr 2011 : 15:06:52
quote:
Originally posted by Arik
Uniform point-buy systems are excellent for standardization and essential for stuff like RPGA; there's always at least one guy who claims he actually rolled all those 17s and 18s ...
Exactly. The reason I put a point-buy in place was because 90% of the adventures they were doing were going to be published adventures (Sons of Gruumsh, Pool of Radiance: Ruins of Myth Drannor, and City of the Spider Queen) in addition to a few minor quests in the Mysteries of the Moonsea book and 1 mission that I did up on my own. I didn't want a PC with crazy stats overshadowing anyone else at the table.
I also thought the DMG said 28 point buy was standard? And going to 32 was for high-powered campaigns. Still, not as high-powered as if my PCs were rolling for dice. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 29 Apr 2011 : 07:51:49
Uniform point-buy systems are excellent for standardization and essential for stuff like RPGA; there's always at least one guy who claims he actually rolled all those 17s and 18s ...
Longterm games tend to involve fixed house rules and DMs who (rightfully) disallow character imports without strict auditing. I haven't yet met a grumble of grognards who haven't established their own convoluted attribute (er, "ability score") generation rituals. |
| ChieftainTwilight |
Posted - 29 Apr 2011 : 06:46:12
32 is the highest amount suggested in the Dungeon Master's Guide, which they detail as being for extremely difficult high-risk heroic adventures, the equivalent of going to Hell at 1st level and coming back in a hand-basket at 4th. ... think Diablo II. XD
the standard is 25 point-buy, with a suggested auto set of six pre-determined scores (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8).
however, I've found that the 30 point-buy system that I use is common among official D&D games online. still though, far too many people are used to high scores, because of the traditional "4d6 minus lowest dice" rule. in fact, the uneven (and especially high) results of those rolls are exactly WHY I stick to a strict point-buy system. |
|
|
