In my group's current run of Tomb of Annihilation, I've run into frustrations with players who are too gung-hoo or impatient. A number of times we spotted enemies, and me being a more cautious player, suggested we analyze the situation, and come up with a strategy. Instead they just attacked. Another time were were in a fight, but I had a number of questions about the actions going on in Chult. So I thought interrogating the enemy was a wise decision. I managed to disarm the last foe with a strength check, and I made my intentions clear. Instead, everyone else killed him. And then, we were in the shrine with the frog monster and we actually DID discuss strategies. I suggested trying to sneak by without drawing it's attention because it seemed like fighting him would take tolls on our health. Instead, one player, without the consent of the others ran right in started a fight.
But that's my story of frustrating teammates. What's yours?
I've definitely dealt with Sir "I just hit them". It's frustrating and I think really childish when players aren't willing to accomodate any style or pace than that they prefer.
There is one player in an online game I play in, that loves to 2nd guess and and backseat DM anything and everything it's a large group of 7 players so it makes almost everything take about x5 longer than it has to, and I get very very frustrated about it.
This is a "way back then" story, since it was when I was playing "Living" Blackmoor 3.5 way back in the early 2000s. I was playing a Lawful Neutral Noble/Fighter (Noble being a class in Blackmoor 3.5) and the party I was with were between settlements on the road (which basically amounts to wilderness). Our party chanced upon a wagon coming down the road and before we knew it, we were jumped by the inhabitants who just so happened to be slavers for the cultists running The Temple of the Frog. We barely managed to overcome them, thankfully the slaver's mage failed his saving throws and we subdued him and one other survivor. Now, the crime of Banditry had a death sentence of hanging in Medieval Europe and Blackmoor is a pseudo-Medieval European setting, but with magic and some steam technology thrown in. I was going to take the 2 scumbags we had managed to subdue out and hang them until dead from the nearest tree, since I am a Noble and I dang well enforce The King's Laws in the wild and the penalty for their crimes was to be an immediate and swift dance on the end of a rope.
Naturally, the party wanted to vote on their fate. I was the only Lawful Neutral person there, the others being a Lawful Good Noble/Paladin, a human Wokan (think a European Priestess-style Witch) and a few others (who I can't remember, but the Paladin and the Wokan I do). I got outvoted because the stupid Paladin wanted to send these 2 slime back to be judged by the elders of the nearest town. Never mind that they were SLAVERS, never mind that Slavery was outlawed and that they were no better than common brigands. In retrospect, I should have delivered the Coup de Grace on them since No Quarter is a valid and legitimate tactic. Stupid me accepting their surrender. But no, we merrily sent them on their way, tied up in their wagon back to the settlement we just left with a note attached.....cause we all know those 2 scumbags couldn't get free of their bonds, take their wagon and try again. The fact we would have lost TUs (Time Units) being slaves in The Temple of the Frog was lost on my party mates....and I'm still burned up about it to this day.
If there are 2 alignments I cannot stand, its Lawful Stupid (aka doofuses that think Lawful Good means Lawful Nice) and Chaotic Stupid (aka Chaotic Neutral which means people really want to play Chaotic Evil).
So at an earlier stage in the campaign the bard in our group was basically given the Dwarven Thrower as accidental loot by the DM. It was given to the Bard since he was the only one that could use it, so the DM left him to it considering the bard ain't a fighter and +3 attack/damage ain't huge for someone like him. Later on down the line we're on this island where everything is going balls up, there's a fire cult on the loose and a villager we just saved turned themselves inside out when we were resting in Leomund's Tiny Hut with them and went all-out The Thing on us. We (stupidly) team up with the rogue's guild in the area so we can track the fire cult down except they're not completely honest about what their agenda is after we've done our part of the bargain.
We go to rest in the building we just conquered and we stupidly trusted two henchmen of theirs that came with us in resting while they kept watch. We woke up, the Dwarven Thrower has been nabbed and the first thing the bard player says on their turn is "Uhhh.. don't know what to do really." We also lost 10,000 gold as the second [bad] rogue pilfered the belongings of the [party] rogue in our group so there was extra salt to all this. I was furious because if we had acted sooner we could've stopped them before they got away and as soon as they ran outside, only me (wizard gnome) and the rogue were even trying to chase them down. So that is 10,000 gold down the drain and a legendary item gone.
After this session we are taken to limbo where a magical being steals my gnome's bag of holding (which held 20,000 gold and lots of other necessary supplies) without even needing to take any check. Just yoinks it. So my gnome is left with literally just what he had on his person and thankfully all of that were his spellbooks, arcane focus and rations. And a healer's kit. Then the DM turns to us after we just want to get off this damn plane because we've had it up to our necks in being betrayed and says, "Why don't you guys trust anyone?"
I'm going to answer this as a player, rather than as a GM.
As a player, probably the most frustrating moments I can remember have revolved around the classic old stand-by excuse of "but it's what my character would do." The #1 case was a friend who decided he wanted to play a "chaotic" thief in AD&D (I don't recall if he was CN or CG -- I know he was not CE). He was in a largely Lawful party, and this was already enough of a potential issue, but then he chose to interpret his character's "chaoticness" as him being an absolute klepto who could not control himself and kept pickpocketing his own party. He would pass notes to the DM as to whom he was going to pickpocket, and he would somehow secretly roll it (not sure how -- we never did notice it, that I recall). Or maybe the DM rolled it. Or maybe they pre-rolled it before the session. Anyway, he pickpocketed us over and over again, even though the Lawful members of the party (most of whom were LN, and my assassin of whom was LE) kept warning him to cut it out and we, the players, repeatedly asked him to stop (and kept getting the "it's what my character would do" response). We were young, and I wasn't assertive enough or experienced enough as a player to say, "Then make up a new PC, or I'm going to stop playing with you." I should have, but I didn't.
We never did manage to get him to cut it the heck out. Even when the Paladin picked him up by his ankles and shook him, and all our treasure fell out, and my assassin threatened to cut his throat right there, and the party then came to the solution that we should just leave him behind in the dungeon... the DM basically talked us out of it and we kept him with us. Knowing he was going to do it again. And again. (And of course, he did.)
As a player now, I would say to the table, this character may be fun for the other player but isn't fun for me -- I am not enjoying it. So either the other guy stops, makes up a new character to play who doesn't do this, or I leave the game. Because I've learned that no D&D is superior to bad D&D. But back then, I wasn't mature enough to realize that.
I'm going to answer this as a player, rather than as a GM.
As a player, probably the most frustrating moments I can remember have revolved around the classic old stand-by excuse of "but it's what my character would do." The #1 case was a friend who decided he wanted to play a "chaotic" thief in AD&D (I don't recall if he was CN or CG -- I know he was not CE). He was in a largely Lawful party, and this was already enough of a potential issue, but then he chose to interpret his character's "chaoticness" as him being an absolute klepto who could not control himself and kept pickpocketing his own party. He would pass notes to the DM as to whom he was going to pickpocket, and he would somehow secretly roll it (not sure how -- we never did notice it, that I recall). Or maybe the DM rolled it. Or maybe they pre-rolled it before the session. Anyway, he pickpocketed us over and over again, even though the Lawful members of the party (most of whom were LN, and my assassin of whom was LE) kept warning him to cut it out and we, the players, repeatedly asked him to stop (and kept getting the "it's what my character would do" response). We were young, and I wasn't assertive enough or experienced enough as a player to say, "Then make up a new PC, or I'm going to stop playing with you." I should have, but I didn't.
We never did manage to get him to cut it the heck out. Even when the Paladin picked him up by his ankles and shook him, and all our treasure fell out, and my assassin threatened to cut his throat right there, and the party then came to the solution that we should just leave him behind in the dungeon... the DM basically talked us out of it and we kept him with us. Knowing he was going to do it again. And again. (And of course, he did.)
As a player now, I would say to the table, this character may be fun for the other player but isn't fun for me -- I am not enjoying it. So either the other guy stops, makes up a new character to play who doesn't do this, or I leave the game. Because I've learned that no D&D is superior to bad D&D. But back then, I wasn't mature enough to realize that.
The character, no. But he was based on that character.
We knew this. We tried to be forgiving because we knew it. But that didn't give him a right to aggravate all the other players. D&D is not a book written by a single person, who doesn't mind if one character is annoying another because he writes them all.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I’m currently having a player who isn’t bad in any way and can be quite fun, but has done actions that really frustrated me as the DM. A few weeks ago the player ignored an obvious plot hook while the party was split up that complicated things because “that’s what my character would do” which I have seen the player be slightly hypocritical about the specific character trait that made the player do it, which honestly sucked for me and in my opinion the player saying that they were going to able to do what he likes if he followed the hook the player would have had much more fun. This decision angered me a lot and I told the player that if they can’t figure out a reason to go through the most obvious plot hook in the reason than they could work with me as the DM to get the character into the story more, or make a new character, and the player said that I as the DM should figure that out. Also last session the player tried to most definitely derail the story with slightly metagamey reasons although with a bit of logic to it by trying to berate NPCs into not forcing the ship players were on from going to the place with obvious plot to not put themselves in danger. As a result of this I have had to make my relatively open to players to change story campaign, a bit more railroady.
Note that the player is really epic despite those scenarios happening. I mean it only really happened once so it’s fine and if it continues I’ll peacefully make sure it stopped. The player over time has been getting better at not doing stuff like that though so I am optimistic!
People throwing everything and the kitchen sink at the first , run of the mill, encounter of the day and then insisting a long rest is necessary at 9:15 in-game time. And then afterwards insisting it’s necessary to make up for the time lost taking a long rest by travelling on until well after dark. And then complaining the DM is being too harsh when they keep getting jumped by enemies in the middle of the night.
People complaining they can’t find the perfect item they’ve been saving up for the moment they find the last gold piece they think they need, despite the only signs of civilization in a 100-mile radius being an abandoned hermit’s cave and the camp of a trio of unsuccessful gold prospectors who feel a bar of soap is too expensive to spend money on.
People complaining during character creation, before a single die is rolled (we use point buy for stat generation), about the mechanics of the class they really want to play but only if they get it houseruled, or about other players not wanting to play characters that cover for their character’s weaknesses, or their character needs more money because their starting equipment isn’t good enough, or the DM is “making unreasonable demands” with regards to their character’s background.
People who refuse every adventure hook dangled in front of them because their character thinks it’s too dangerous/is not interesting/doesn’t offer enough of a reward/the NPC can’t be trusted.
That said, I really want to stress all of these are rare. Listing them like this might give the impression I’m one wrong word away from flipping the table and walking away every other session, and that’s certainly not the case.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Wow, Pang, those are great... I have seen each of these over the years, not always specifically in D&D.
Not sure “great” is the right word. :p Regardless, people tend to grow out of them, in some cases with the help of a firm nudge. It’s usually not even worth getting worked up over, but maybe that’s because getting a group together hasn’t been difficult for a good while. It helps if you can be philosophical about the whole thing - I can walk away and make do with online offerings without feeling torn now. I very much understand that if your options are limited, it sucks when someone spoils it for you by being childish.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Rule of Thumb: If a player sits down at the table and the first thing they tell you about their character is that they are Chaotic Neutral... you probably don't want or need that player at your table.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Tayn of Darkwood. Lvl 10 human Life Cleric of Lathander. Retired.
Ikram Sahir ibn Malik al-Sayyid Ra'ad, Second Son of the House of Ra'ad, Defender of the Burning Sands. Lvl 9 Brass Dragonborn Sorcerer + Greater Fire Elemental Devil.
Viktor Gavriil. Lvl 20 White Dragonborn Grave Cleric, of Kurgan the God of Death.
It seems that this thread is like the others where the problem players are players who think their character is more important than anything else.
...but this thread is unique in that there is an example of when someone wanting the best for everyone is at the wrong table. It works both ways. If everyone else are murder hobos and that's not what you want, you are at the wrong table. (I would talk to the DM about graciously bowing out of such a party. Muder hobo parties are not my style, and my style doesn't get to dictate what the table does if they all want something else.)
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
It seems that this thread is like the others where the problem players are players who think their character is more important than anything else.
...but this thread is unique in that there is an example of when someone wanting the best for everyone is at the wrong table. It works both ways. If everyone else are murder hobos and that's not what you want, you are at the wrong table. (I would talk to the DM about graciously bowing out of such a party. Muder hobo parties are not my style, and my style doesn't get to dictate what the table does if they all want something else.)
I think that most "frustrating" player behavior, as demonstrated in the examples here and on other threads like this, comes from the same source: selfishness.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
For most of my gaming history, I was limited to a small pool of friends and associates who played the game at all. I didn't have the option to tell any of them to Just Get Lost. It could get pretty frustrating, both as a fellow player and as a DM.
There was The Girlfriend. She was only there because her boyfriend wanted to play. Learn the rules? Nope. Invest in a character and roleplaying it? Nope. She'd get bored and have her character do apparently random foolish things though.
We had The Special Guest. He was the best friend of our DM at the time. He didn't want to play most sessions, but when he did take a mind to, our DM always welcomed him. He refused under any circumstances to play any Alignment other than Evil. Given the slightest opportunity he'd do something unpleasant to one or more of the other characters, but hey, he was just playing his alignment, no hard feelings intended.
We had Captain Comic Relief. Did not matter in the slightest what tone the DM wanted to set for the game. He wanted to play something silly. His favorite character was his Kender Barbarian. Not that any of our games was ever set in Krynn mind you. His signature move was flinging excrement with his Hoopak. Preferably after lighting it on fire. It was just fine to him if he did no appreciable damage. He thought it was hysterical. Didn't let him play his favorite? He'd find something. How about a Gnome Fighter with a 10 foot pole he carried with him everywhere? He'd use it to pole-vault into combats. Or a Bard whose performance art was Stand Up Comedy? Or a Thief who used his skills mainly to play practical jokes?
Last but not least is one I haven't got a good title for. He wasn't interested in anything other than combat. He'd just shut up and sit there for anything else. When it came time for a fight, he just had to be the most powerful character in the party. He couldn't get what he wanted with any of the standard classes. He never had an original thought either. He would just comb though supplements, especially the most recently published one, looking for something that would let him dominate. He changed characters more often than many people change their socks. He'd *****, moan, whine, and sulk until he was allowed to play whatever it was from the Complete Book Of Utter Nonsense, and when that didn't work the quest would go on.
Now me, on the other hand, I was just the perfect player in every way. I would never call into question something the DM or another player did and show them the actual rules about it. Nope. Not me. Nor did I ever fail to make characters who had a ready-made motivation to join up with a group of complete strangers and go on adventures with them. Nuh-uh. Not me. Must have been that other player. And it was the DM's job to figure out why I was there anyway. Er... I mean that other player. Yeah.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
<Insert clever signature here>
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
In my group's current run of Tomb of Annihilation, I've run into frustrations with players who are too gung-hoo or impatient. A number of times we spotted enemies, and me being a more cautious player, suggested we analyze the situation, and come up with a strategy. Instead they just attacked. Another time were were in a fight, but I had a number of questions about the actions going on in Chult. So I thought interrogating the enemy was a wise decision. I managed to disarm the last foe with a strength check, and I made my intentions clear. Instead, everyone else killed him. And then, we were in the shrine with the frog monster and we actually DID discuss strategies. I suggested trying to sneak by without drawing it's attention because it seemed like fighting him would take tolls on our health. Instead, one player, without the consent of the others ran right in started a fight.
But that's my story of frustrating teammates. What's yours?
I've definitely dealt with Sir "I just hit them". It's frustrating and I think really childish when players aren't willing to accomodate any style or pace than that they prefer.
There is one player in an online game I play in, that loves to 2nd guess and and backseat DM anything and everything it's a large group of 7 players so it makes almost everything take about x5 longer than it has to, and I get very very frustrated about it.
PyscoSonic#4554
This is a "way back then" story, since it was when I was playing "Living" Blackmoor 3.5 way back in the early 2000s. I was playing a Lawful Neutral Noble/Fighter (Noble being a class in Blackmoor 3.5) and the party I was with were between settlements on the road (which basically amounts to wilderness). Our party chanced upon a wagon coming down the road and before we knew it, we were jumped by the inhabitants who just so happened to be slavers for the cultists running The Temple of the Frog. We barely managed to overcome them, thankfully the slaver's mage failed his saving throws and we subdued him and one other survivor. Now, the crime of Banditry had a death sentence of hanging in Medieval Europe and Blackmoor is a pseudo-Medieval European setting, but with magic and some steam technology thrown in. I was going to take the 2 scumbags we had managed to subdue out and hang them until dead from the nearest tree, since I am a Noble and I dang well enforce The King's Laws in the wild and the penalty for their crimes was to be an immediate and swift dance on the end of a rope.
Naturally, the party wanted to vote on their fate. I was the only Lawful Neutral person there, the others being a Lawful Good Noble/Paladin, a human Wokan (think a European Priestess-style Witch) and a few others (who I can't remember, but the Paladin and the Wokan I do). I got outvoted because the stupid Paladin wanted to send these 2 slime back to be judged by the elders of the nearest town. Never mind that they were SLAVERS, never mind that Slavery was outlawed and that they were no better than common brigands. In retrospect, I should have delivered the Coup de Grace on them since No Quarter is a valid and legitimate tactic. Stupid me accepting their surrender. But no, we merrily sent them on their way, tied up in their wagon back to the settlement we just left with a note attached.....cause we all know those 2 scumbags couldn't get free of their bonds, take their wagon and try again. The fact we would have lost TUs (Time Units) being slaves in The Temple of the Frog was lost on my party mates....and I'm still burned up about it to this day.
If there are 2 alignments I cannot stand, its Lawful Stupid (aka doofuses that think Lawful Good means Lawful Nice) and Chaotic Stupid (aka Chaotic Neutral which means people really want to play Chaotic Evil).
So at an earlier stage in the campaign the bard in our group was basically given the Dwarven Thrower as accidental loot by the DM. It was given to the Bard since he was the only one that could use it, so the DM left him to it considering the bard ain't a fighter and +3 attack/damage ain't huge for someone like him. Later on down the line we're on this island where everything is going balls up, there's a fire cult on the loose and a villager we just saved turned themselves inside out when we were resting in Leomund's Tiny Hut with them and went all-out The Thing on us. We (stupidly) team up with the rogue's guild in the area so we can track the fire cult down except they're not completely honest about what their agenda is after we've done our part of the bargain.
We go to rest in the building we just conquered and we stupidly trusted two henchmen of theirs that came with us in resting while they kept watch. We woke up, the Dwarven Thrower has been nabbed and the first thing the bard player says on their turn is "Uhhh.. don't know what to do really." We also lost 10,000 gold as the second [bad] rogue pilfered the belongings of the [party] rogue in our group so there was extra salt to all this. I was furious because if we had acted sooner we could've stopped them before they got away and as soon as they ran outside, only me (wizard gnome) and the rogue were even trying to chase them down. So that is 10,000 gold down the drain and a legendary item gone.
After this session we are taken to limbo where a magical being steals my gnome's bag of holding (which held 20,000 gold and lots of other necessary supplies) without even needing to take any check. Just yoinks it. So my gnome is left with literally just what he had on his person and thankfully all of that were his spellbooks, arcane focus and rations. And a healer's kit. Then the DM turns to us after we just want to get off this damn plane because we've had it up to our necks in being betrayed and says, "Why don't you guys trust anyone?"
I'm going to answer this as a player, rather than as a GM.
As a player, probably the most frustrating moments I can remember have revolved around the classic old stand-by excuse of "but it's what my character would do." The #1 case was a friend who decided he wanted to play a "chaotic" thief in AD&D (I don't recall if he was CN or CG -- I know he was not CE). He was in a largely Lawful party, and this was already enough of a potential issue, but then he chose to interpret his character's "chaoticness" as him being an absolute klepto who could not control himself and kept pickpocketing his own party. He would pass notes to the DM as to whom he was going to pickpocket, and he would somehow secretly roll it (not sure how -- we never did notice it, that I recall). Or maybe the DM rolled it. Or maybe they pre-rolled it before the session. Anyway, he pickpocketed us over and over again, even though the Lawful members of the party (most of whom were LN, and my assassin of whom was LE) kept warning him to cut it out and we, the players, repeatedly asked him to stop (and kept getting the "it's what my character would do" response). We were young, and I wasn't assertive enough or experienced enough as a player to say, "Then make up a new PC, or I'm going to stop playing with you." I should have, but I didn't.
We never did manage to get him to cut it the heck out. Even when the Paladin picked him up by his ankles and shook him, and all our treasure fell out, and my assassin threatened to cut his throat right there, and the party then came to the solution that we should just leave him behind in the dungeon... the DM basically talked us out of it and we kept him with us. Knowing he was going to do it again. And again. (And of course, he did.)
As a player now, I would say to the table, this character may be fun for the other player but isn't fun for me -- I am not enjoying it. So either the other guy stops, makes up a new character to play who doesn't do this, or I leave the game. Because I've learned that no D&D is superior to bad D&D. But back then, I wasn't mature enough to realize that.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Was his character named Tasslehoff Burrfoot?
<Insert clever signature here>
The character, no. But he was based on that character.
We knew this. We tried to be forgiving because we knew it. But that didn't give him a right to aggravate all the other players. D&D is not a book written by a single person, who doesn't mind if one character is annoying another because he writes them all.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I’m currently having a player who isn’t bad in any way and can be quite fun, but has done actions that really frustrated me as the DM. A few weeks ago the player ignored an obvious plot hook while the party was split up that complicated things because “that’s what my character would do” which I have seen the player be slightly hypocritical about the specific character trait that made the player do it, which honestly sucked for me and in my opinion the player saying that they were going to able to do what he likes if he followed the hook the player would have had much more fun. This decision angered me a lot and I told the player that if they can’t figure out a reason to go through the most obvious plot hook in the reason than they could work with me as the DM to get the character into the story more, or make a new character, and the player said that I as the DM should figure that out. Also last session the player tried to most definitely derail the story with slightly metagamey reasons although with a bit of logic to it by trying to berate NPCs into not forcing the ship players were on from going to the place with obvious plot to not put themselves in danger. As a result of this I have had to make my relatively open to players to change story campaign, a bit more railroady.
Note that the player is really epic despite those scenarios happening. I mean it only really happened once so it’s fine and if it continues I’ll peacefully make sure it stopped. The player over time has been getting better at not doing stuff like that though so I am optimistic!
People throwing everything and the kitchen sink at the first , run of the mill, encounter of the day and then insisting a long rest is necessary at 9:15 in-game time. And then afterwards insisting it’s necessary to make up for the time lost taking a long rest by travelling on until well after dark. And then complaining the DM is being too harsh when they keep getting jumped by enemies in the middle of the night.
People complaining they can’t find the perfect item they’ve been saving up for the moment they find the last gold piece they think they need, despite the only signs of civilization in a 100-mile radius being an abandoned hermit’s cave and the camp of a trio of unsuccessful gold prospectors who feel a bar of soap is too expensive to spend money on.
People complaining during character creation, before a single die is rolled (we use point buy for stat generation), about the mechanics of the class they really want to play but only if they get it houseruled, or about other players not wanting to play characters that cover for their character’s weaknesses, or their character needs more money because their starting equipment isn’t good enough, or the DM is “making unreasonable demands” with regards to their character’s background.
People who refuse every adventure hook dangled in front of them because their character thinks it’s too dangerous/is not interesting/doesn’t offer enough of a reward/the NPC can’t be trusted.
That said, I really want to stress all of these are rare. Listing them like this might give the impression I’m one wrong word away from flipping the table and walking away every other session, and that’s certainly not the case.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Wow, Pang, those are great... I have seen each of these over the years, not always specifically in D&D.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Not sure “great” is the right word. :p Regardless, people tend to grow out of them, in some cases with the help of a firm nudge. It’s usually not even worth getting worked up over, but maybe that’s because getting a group together hasn’t been difficult for a good while. It helps if you can be philosophical about the whole thing - I can walk away and make do with online offerings without feeling torn now. I very much understand that if your options are limited, it sucks when someone spoils it for you by being childish.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
People who keep tryna kill everything
Is Blackmoor part of the Mystara campaign setting or is it its own separate world?
Rule of Thumb: If a player sits down at the table and the first thing they tell you about their character is that they are Chaotic Neutral... you probably don't want or need that player at your table.
Tayn of Darkwood. Lvl 10 human Life Cleric of Lathander. Retired.
Ikram Sahir ibn Malik al-Sayyid Ra'ad, Second Son of the House of Ra'ad, Defender of the Burning Sands. Lvl 9 Brass Dragonborn Sorcerer + Greater Fire Elemental Devil.
Viktor Gavriil. Lvl 20 White Dragonborn Grave Cleric, of Kurgan the God of Death.
Anzio Faro. Lvl 5 Prot. Aasimar Light Cleric.
It was basically considered part of the ancient Mystara setting though there is its "mirror' in Greyhawk.....
Thanks
The Archbarony of Blackmoor, right?
But that doesn’t have the whole high-tech thing that the Mystaran Blackmoor does. Right?
It seems that this thread is like the others where the problem players are players who think their character is more important than anything else.
...but this thread is unique in that there is an example of when someone wanting the best for everyone is at the wrong table. It works both ways. If everyone else are murder hobos and that's not what you want, you are at the wrong table. (I would talk to the DM about graciously bowing out of such a party. Muder hobo parties are not my style, and my style doesn't get to dictate what the table does if they all want something else.)
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
You raise a very good point
@Kotath thanks
I think that most "frustrating" player behavior, as demonstrated in the examples here and on other threads like this, comes from the same source: selfishness.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
For most of my gaming history, I was limited to a small pool of friends and associates who played the game at all. I didn't have the option to tell any of them to Just Get Lost. It could get pretty frustrating, both as a fellow player and as a DM.
There was The Girlfriend. She was only there because her boyfriend wanted to play. Learn the rules? Nope. Invest in a character and roleplaying it? Nope. She'd get bored and have her character do apparently random foolish things though.
We had The Special Guest. He was the best friend of our DM at the time. He didn't want to play most sessions, but when he did take a mind to, our DM always welcomed him. He refused under any circumstances to play any Alignment other than Evil. Given the slightest opportunity he'd do something unpleasant to one or more of the other characters, but hey, he was just playing his alignment, no hard feelings intended.
We had Captain Comic Relief. Did not matter in the slightest what tone the DM wanted to set for the game. He wanted to play something silly. His favorite character was his Kender Barbarian. Not that any of our games was ever set in Krynn mind you. His signature move was flinging excrement with his Hoopak. Preferably after lighting it on fire. It was just fine to him if he did no appreciable damage. He thought it was hysterical. Didn't let him play his favorite? He'd find something. How about a Gnome Fighter with a 10 foot pole he carried with him everywhere? He'd use it to pole-vault into combats. Or a Bard whose performance art was Stand Up Comedy? Or a Thief who used his skills mainly to play practical jokes?
Last but not least is one I haven't got a good title for. He wasn't interested in anything other than combat. He'd just shut up and sit there for anything else. When it came time for a fight, he just had to be the most powerful character in the party. He couldn't get what he wanted with any of the standard classes. He never had an original thought either. He would just comb though supplements, especially the most recently published one, looking for something that would let him dominate. He changed characters more often than many people change their socks. He'd *****, moan, whine, and sulk until he was allowed to play whatever it was from the Complete Book Of Utter Nonsense, and when that didn't work the quest would go on.
Now me, on the other hand, I was just the perfect player in every way. I would never call into question something the DM or another player did and show them the actual rules about it. Nope. Not me. Nor did I ever fail to make characters who had a ready-made motivation to join up with a group of complete strangers and go on adventures with them. Nuh-uh. Not me. Must have been that other player. And it was the DM's job to figure out why I was there anyway. Er... I mean that other player. Yeah.
<Insert clever signature here>