Ok...lol wut? A DM's story about stupid party members

[Venser]

Hello all :)

I usualy don't have these kind of problems, but something happened to me yesterday that I would like to share with you and hear your opinions. You are free to share your similar stories, I would enjoy reading them :D

So I have been running this campaign for quite a while now, and yesterday two of my party members have quit.

The problem was mainly our wizard. She is a nooby who plays for the first time and she chose a wizard as a class, which is the most difficult class to play when you have absolutely no experiance at all. As a good and understanding DM, I have watched over her and helped her with a lot of questions about spells and rules during the campaign.

A major douche of a player had rebeled against this.

The first thing was how come she does not get attacked so often. Now, I love challanges and I love powerful monsters, but if you have a situation where a very strong and very inteligent monster is fighting a group of adventurers and fighter and rogue deal it the most damage while wizard can't even penetrate his spell resistance, than that monster shouldn't be bothering with the wizard who can't do jack s**t but attack those who can actualy hurt him.

The example is when they were fighting three high level demons. One party member dealt over 80 damage per full attack and a paladin killed two of them. The wizard just stood in the background not knowing what to do beacuse the demon's SR was just way too high. Soon, two party members had died and the demon retreated after getting what he wanted.

Then came the rage...

''A demon should know to attack the wizard first because he is a major threat.'' What wizard? This one who did not break his spell resistance even once? Sorry, but if I were a demon I would first destroy the paladin who is my biggest current threat.

The other problem were the ruls. Now, I am not a strict DM but if I overlook something then I overlook it with a good reason, but douchebag player had been checking the rules every single time when wizard tried to do something and I have overlooked it(like spell failure chance on padded armor). I know that it is in the rules, but if a DM says that it is ok, it is ok, you don't be a douchebag and start ruining the game for everyone because it is not by the rules.

Then came the PVP ban. Captain douchebag had tried to kill(and succeeded on two characters) every single character that got a magical item and he didn't. Even if that was something totaly useless to him.

He tried to kill the wizard when she got an legacy item. His character was true neutral who had traveled with her for a couple of weeks and she had saved his ass several times. I am sorry, but that is not in the alignment...a true neutral character would never do that, that is just chaotic evil(CN at the least). So to save the wizard and everyone else who would get a magical item, I had banned PVP. You can't believe the rage that came afterwards.

The last thing, the last drop for him, was when they found, at level 6, a staff of power hidden in a cave and guarded by a powerful monster...and the wizard, the ONLY spellcaster, got it(it was just natural).

Now, every experianced player knows that something like Staff of Power does not lie on the ground for no reason. No sane DM will give you an item that powerful when you are level 6, not without a good reason(and there was a good reason...it had belonged to an archmage but it was stolen and now he is pissed and is attacking the villagers, demanding his staff back). The rage went on and on and on ''Why would she get something like that and we got just these +2 items, why?''

So eventualy he quit and he took another player with him.

Now, I find this situation extremely funny, I don't know about you guys, but please inform me if I did anything wrong.

[Lisselys]

As far as I can see and if you really care about my opinion, just don't care.
He's an idiot, full stop. I've been a terrible mage in my first campaign, if my dm wasn't a really great one helping me I'd have abandoned D&D long time ago. He did some rule-bending as you did, and everything was pretty fine.
He's just a hot-head, don't worry.
As for dealing with them...
Either try to talk to him about how the mage is unexperienced, or just don't bother about him

[Venser]

Thank you :D

I mean, there were situations where I could have just killed off the wizard in one hit, but you don't do that to a new and unexperianced player.
I mean, I know how would I feel if I were a new player and the DM tortured me and killed me off several times. I would lose my will to play.

[Killer Angel]

Given that usually, in such a situation, DMs ask for advice on how to deal with the problematic player, I would say that the issue was positively fixed, and you can fully enjoy the game. :smallsmile:

Your Captain douchebag was nice, he solved the problem by himself, you lucky DM! :smalltongue:

[SilverLeaf167]

The player was clearly overreacting to small matters that didn't even really matter at all. It seems like he's the kind of player who either thinks his character should be the best at everything, or that all characters should always get the exact same amount of attention, loot and experience.

I'll admit that it sounds a bit weird that the demons just walked away and ignored the Wizard totally, but throwing a hissy-fit about it or arguing that they know how NPCs should act better than the DM is just plain idiotic.
Not realizing that there is a good explanation for the powerful loot given to a single party member is understandable. Especially if you've been apparently "favoring" that player earlier, it's not that crazy of an assumption that you, the DM, are indeed somehow favoring the Wizard, going soft on him and giving him the best loot etc.

[Lisselys]

That's exactly what I'm saying.
I've been a TERRIBLE mage (E.g. I tried to cure a high level Npc with bull's strength 'cause it said that it increased the strength of a Character, therefore in my mind strength--->Life Force. Yeah, I wasn't fully aware of what ability score meant :smallredface: ) but my Dm helped me a lot, and now I really enjoy playing and I'm a really helpful mage.
We had a player like that, and we kicked him right away. The game suddenly became fluid and more enjoyable.
For the sake of friendship, however, try to talk to him leading him into your decisions. Try to ask him what he would do with a new player, he'll probably get what is going on and he'll become helpful too.
D&D is about having fun kicking ass, if a friend of mine can do it better than me I don't complain, but have fun kicking asses stronger than mine thanks to him

[Cwymbran-San]

As an addition, should that ever happen again, give your stupid ones the same explanation you gave us.

P: Demon, why u no attack wizard?
DM: Maybe he felt quite safe within his cocoon of spell resistance, and wants to kill something dangerous to him

P: DM, why u hand out phat loot to wizzie and not me?
DM: Maybe, it belongs to someone else?

P: DM, why u no allow pvp anymoar?
DM: Well, let's see...because D&D is a cooperative game you moron?

As said above, this imbecile solved the problem himself by leaving, congrats to you and the people who actually want to PLAY this game, the way it is meant to be played.

[Venser]

The player was clearly overreacting to small matters that didn't even really matter at all. It seems like he's the kind of player who either thinks his character should be the best at everything, or that all characters should always get the exact same amount of attention, loot and experience.

I'll admit that it sounds a bit weird that the demons just walked away and ignored the Wizard totally, but throwing a hissy-fit about it or arguing that they know how NPCs should act better than the DM is just plain idiotic.
Not realizing that there is a good explanation for the powerful loot given to a single party member is understandable. Especially if you've been apparently "favoring" that player earlier, it's not that crazy of an assumption that you, the DM, are indeed somehow favoring the Wizard, going soft on him and giving him the best loot etc.

About the DM faovring a party member.

In my last high level campaign a guy had played a cleric(one of the two who had quit, but not capatin douchebag) and by some strange current of events, it turned out that he can stop an ancient prohpecy and save the world as we know it.

The player had enjoyed it and as a good DM and for the sake of the story, I had favored him and protected him several times. He did die eventualy xD

Now when there is no cataclysmic prophecy and the attention is not on him but on a less experianced player, he is raging how she is the DM's favorite and how she should be treated as an equal, totaly forgetting all the favors I did his last character when he was just a noob.

Sorry, but that is not fair.

And about the loot...captain douchebag had been in several of my campaigns and he had run a lot of campaigns. I would expect someone with that kind of experiance to know that stuff like Staff of Power just don't lie around for no reason.

[SilverLeaf167]

I never said you were favoring the Wizard or that Cpt. Douchebag was reacting in a reasonable manner. I just said it's quite understandable to come to that conclusion, especially if you're short-tempered or just plain stupid.

Something like "Staffs of Power don't just lie around for no reason" being a reliable assumption depends a lot on the DM, and as far as we or the players knew it might have been just a big flumph on your part or just another instance of favoring the player. Again, I'm not saying you failed or that the player had any real reason or right to act like that, but again, the conclusion itself isn't incredibly unreasonable.

[Mystify]

Yeah, it sounds like you are better off without him. I've seen some really dysfunctional players and parties, but that takes the cake.

[Kalmageddon]

Well since no-one else is pointing this out I will: she is a, well, "she".
Thus your players probably think that you are helping her not because she's a nooby but because she's a female and you are interested in getting her attention.

[Lonely Tylenol]

Given what I just read, I'll say that I understand Capt. Douchebag's reaction, but not his response. I have little personal experience on this specific matter (all DMs I've played with have been good about this kind of thing, and if one party member gets something the rest don't get, it's usually on accident), but it sounds like this campaign does lean pretty heavily toward the wizard player (the demon ignoring the wizard makes little sense to me, for example), which might not be what the others signed up for at all.

That said, PvP is unreasonable, and it sounds like you're nevertheless better off without him.

[DigoDragon]

So yeah, seems the majority think you're fine without the "Major D" player, but I'm curious about that second player he took with him. What's that person's story? Did the second person also get tired of the arguing? Or is it that the bad player was his ride home?

Curious to know.

[Venser]

So yeah, seems the majority think you're fine without the "Major D" player, but I'm curious about that second player he took with him. What's that person's story? Did the second person also get tired of the arguing? Or is it that the bad player was his ride home?

Curious to know.

The second player is a great guy, but extremely naive and can easily be convinced in doing something. So yes...he was convinced that leaving is the best option.

[Studoku]

Well since no-one else is pointing this out I will: she is a, well, "she".
Thus your players probably think that you are helping her not because she's a nooby but because she's a female and you are interested in getting her attention.


Given what I just read, I'll say that I understand Capt. Douchebag's reaction, but not his response. I have little personal experience on this specific matter (all DMs I've played with have been good about this kind of thing, and if one party member gets something the rest don't get, it's usually on accident), but it sounds like this campaign does lean pretty heavily toward the wizard player (the demon ignoring the wizard makes little sense to me, for example), which might not be what the others signed up for at all.
I'm not condoning Capt. Douchebag's actions- especially not the "I'mma gonna stab mah party for their lewt" part- but I agree it's possible he came to this conclusion. With the way he tried to handle this "problem" though, I think your group is better off without him.

As for the other guy, I'd recommend talking to him. Ask him if he had any problems with your DMing. If you're right that he just left because D told him too, remind him that he's still welcome in the group. As well as giving you one of your players back, another player leaving with him will probably be seen by D as proof that he's in the right.

[LansXero]

It sounds an awful lot like you are white-knighting for the girl playing the wizard; if you are going to fudge rules, then house-rule the change in and make it so everyone gets away with it, otherwise it IS unfair. I have a problem where whenever I talk to a girl, unless I focus, my voice changes to a softer, higher pitch... and people always think Im trying too hard to get their attention. Perhaps you are sending off unconscious signals like that? (it took me years before people pointed it out to me... so embarrasing >_<, but its totally involuntary).

[Venser]

It sounds an awful lot like you are white-knighting for the girl playing the wizard; if you are going to fudge rules, then house-rule the change in and make it so everyone gets away with it, otherwise it IS unfair. I have a problem where whenever I talk to a girl, unless I focus, my voice changes to a softer, higher pitch... and people always think Im trying too hard to get their attention. Perhaps you are sending off unconscious signals like that? (it took me years before people pointed it out to me... so embarrasing >_<, but its totally involuntary).

Nah, she's my best friend :P

And the rules that I change apply to everyone. If anything, I make the game easier for the entire party.

[panaikhan]

In all my years of gaming, I've never condoned PvP. Sure, there can be some pretty dramatic roleplaying, but in our group no-one actually reaches for the dice (or would be allowed to).

Sheltering a newbie is all well and good for a while, but they need to get something like a grip fairly quickly.
The combined factors of 'sheltered newbie + powerful item only she can use' is unfortunate, and could be misinterpreted, but Capt. D's reaction to someone else getting the spotlight shows his glaring problem AND solves it in the same stroke.

[Sunken Valley]

Did the Douche feel he was useless in game? What class was he? because he could have felt he wasn't contributing. Although I do have to agree that the rules are there for a reason. If you are alerted to them, you should instate them instantly (but not retroactively). Although Padded Armour is only 5% failiure.

Question: Why are you fighting creatures with such high SR at LV6? What type of Demon are they? Because a DM should make creatures level appropriate. Also, how were LV 6 characters dealing 80 damage?

[Engine]

And the rules that I change apply to everyone. If anything, I make the game easier for the entire party.

Do you said that before the game started?
If you said before game started that you don't apply arcane spell failure chance, than no one could really complain because house rules exist and everyone could have gained some benefit from them.
But if you bent the rules during game, well, a complain is entirely reasonable. A polite complain, but still a complain.

By the way, if you want to shelter a newbie player you should talk with your group first. You should ask for their help, so sheltering the newbie player will be their job, too.

[Seatbelt]

Did the Douche feel he was useless in game? What class was he? because he could have felt he wasn't contributing. Although I do have to agree that the rules are there for a reason. If you are alerted to them, you should instate them instantly (but not retroactively). Although Padded Armour is only 5% failiure.

Question: Why are you fighting creatures with such high SR at LV6? What type of Demon are they? Because a DM should make creatures level appropriate. Also, how were LV 6 characters dealing 80 damage?


On a full attaxck my power-attacking barbarian player can deal around 80 damage if he rolls high. So can my warblade player if he gets off Stormguard warrior in the appropriate way, and they're only level 6-7 and only somewhat optimized for damage.

[Venser]

Do you said that before the game started?
If you said before game started that you don't apply arcane spell failure chance, than no one could really complain because house rules exist and everyone could have gained some benefit from them.
But if you bent the rules during game, well, a complain is entirely reasonable. A polite complain, but still a complain.

By the way, if you want to shelter a newbie player you should talk with your group first. You should ask for their help, so sheltering the newbie player will be their job, too.

Well...group is more ''I don't care if he/she is new, lets play.'' and it is all fun for some time until the newbie gets sheltered in combat.

@Sunken Valley

He was a warmage at first who dealt an insane amout of damage. When he died his next class was a cleric(soon to be radiant servant) and was mostly the most important member because of his healing ability.

Demons were in the previous campaign which did not last too long. Forgot to clarify that...the newbie wizard was also there, though she knew absolutely nothing about the game(she got a little bit better during the campaign where mr. douche left, but she was still a hardcore out of the box newbie) and ofcourse, douch tried to kill her several times during that campaign as well.

[Dragonsoul]

I think you got lucky with him leaving, Moaning , rules lawyering and complaining is fine I can't in good faith complain about that(As I was/am no saint about that) but PvP, is a nono 99.999% of the time.It destroys party cohesion and just ruins campaigns.

Mind you I did lose party members to a Rod of Wonder in my last game(Delayed Blast Fireball, although the spider he was aiming at did make him reflex save and survive)

[Kalmageddon]

By the way, if you want to shelter a newbie player you should talk with your group first. You should ask for their help, so sheltering the newbie player will be their job, too.

I have to agree with this. Being a nooby could be explained in-game too and can provide some roleplaying fuel: maybe her wizard never left the comfort and safety of her magic tower/Hogwarts/library until the adventure started and one of the other characters is tasked/payed/kindly asked to look after her.

That said, I would have strongly discouraged a new player from playing a Wizard, if she likes magic there are better choices for a nooby, like a bard, a sorcerer or even a warlock, they all have the chance to do some neat magic tricks but their selection of spells is limited, thus making it easier for the player to remember which does what... Also, they don't have to prepare them (and the warlock can just spam them all day long).

[Bloodgruve]

I agree that it seems your problem is solved. To me DnD is about sitting around a table with others that enjoy the game from a social and mechanical aspect. Its just as much about the rules as it is about the people involved. Its tough to lose good players that know the game but it's worse to keep D-Bags at your table. I would have told him that there is no room at my table for that kind of behavior.

That being said, I'm beginning to dislike house rules unless they are consistent. Its tough to build and optimize a character just to have a house rule or DM call lessen it.

GL
Blood~

[danzibr]

Yeah, it sounds like you are better off without him. I've seen some really dysfunctional players and parties, but that takes the cake.
Yeah, your party took a bit step up with Cpt. Douchebag leaving, sounds like.

[Tyndmyr]

So eventualy he quit and he took another player with him.

The sad part is really the other player leaving.

I feel like there's more to this story than has been told...why did the other player leave?

[Dairuga]

Warning. A long post ahead. But I think it is worth the read. You might find yourself laughing, or shaking your head slightly. Keep in mind, this happened about.. two months ago, to a month ago. Any input would be muchly appreciated.


Oh boy, this reminds me of my own story. Except I was a player, and my friends were the DM, and the DM's friends.

So here am I, completely new, not having tried anything. Everything is fine, I get introduced, I get a load of books dumped on me and get told to read them. Everything is fine. I make a wizard, handy-dandy, I like wizards. I have a good memory, I quickly scoured over spell lists, learned how to calculate DC, learned how to overcome Spell resistance, etc. The works.

So, the campaign starts.
The DM's friend plays his own, home-made wolfen race, which have a +12 on Dex and +10 on Con in return for having most living things hate them (For an arbitrary reason I do not know), which makes for a completely balanced character, or so I am told. The DM said that it was all alright. The assigned class was Slayer. I am playing a human. That one feat I got did not seem too good in comparison, but I carried on. Everyone is told that they can have 1 Magical item. Whatever they want. One item. I look good and hard over the items presented to me, as they handed me a magical compendium to read trough. I pick out a headband of intellect +4, as we were playing a level 5 campaign first, and I did not want to... Well, yes. I did not want to go for a +6, as that seemed like something that would be far too overpowered.

The slayer picked "Bracers of Relentless Might". The DM applauded him for the excellent choice of items.

The rest of the team was a Psion, and a Cleric. So then. I am there, with.. Little knowledge to how things work. We meet in a town, and start traveling. THe travel takes about ten days, or so I am told. And all trough this time, thhe psion says that he puts all his PP inside a gem (He made sure that he got a clear, high quality gem before leaving town), and by the end of the travel, the gem had over 100 PP in it. When he arrived at the city, we found high level guards. He released the energy in the gem and killed the guard instantly. (He said it dealt 100d6 damage) The DM said that was a splendid idea. I was a bit lost. I asked him about it, and he said that Spellcasters and Psions could store their Spell points and Power points in clear objects. THe higher quality it had, the more points they could store.

I had never heard such a rule before, but they said it was fully good. It was "TSR Legal". I was not quite sure what the meant, but apparently, that means it was fully legal. I asked "Oh, so you mean we are playing by Homebrew rules?", having heard that term a few times before. They shake their head. "No, no. Not homebrew. This is fully TSR legal." But onwards, it gets sillier.

So then, the first combat. Someone have a "Ring of Fireballs", which, when threaded around a candle, lets them cast 100 fireballs before it is depleted. So, they push the candle up against an enemy, and say they fire off four fireballs at once, which quadruples the DC of the fireballs, as well as Quadrupling the damage. When casting spells, they said, you are allowed to cast up to four spells per turn, and you can stack them for cumulative effect, as well as making them harder to resist.

At that point, I could only go "Ooooh... I did not know that". Hey, I had never played D&D before, and this was the only group that would let me in. I... Felt a bit odd about it, as It was not mentioned anywhere in the rulebooks (And you could not do anything of the sort in Neverwinter Nights, my only D&D like experience up till then). I could not say anything against the DM, because two people had already started arguing with the DM, and they were thrown out of the group. I didn't want to be thrown out, so I stuck with them.

So... Campaigns started and ended. We never once managed to stick to a campaign more than one session at a time. We made a campaign, we played out that day. And the next time we met up, the DM was tired of it, so we created new characters, new levels, new everything. This happened about.. six-seven times or so.

At one time, our party consisted of me being a wizard, another being some savage berserker, and another party member being a Chaos Mage. We started a level 15 campaign, so we were allowed to start with some magic items. I started with Ring gates, because I have a fascination with them. One day in, and the Chaos Mage knocked me out with a snap of her finger, stole my ring gates, and erased my memories of them with some odd spell. That was not a very fun experience, not at all. the DM patted this guy on the shoulder and said that it was very natural, because Chaos mages love magical items, and they are expected to take every magical items they find.

So then, the next campaign... I am getting tired of being a good character, because... Things were starting to get on my nerves. So I want to create a Chaotic Neutral character. They ask me what insanity I am picking. I am not fully understanding what they mean. They explain that. "Lawful good characters are good, right? Obeying the law. And chaotic evil characters are evil. Chaotic Neutral characters are INSANE! Chaotic neutral characters are bat**** crazy. THey are characters that you never know what will do next!" They said, with great enthusiasm. And Here I thought chaotic neutral meant that the character was doing things for his own winning, and did what -he- wanted. Apparently not.

So that pretty much sums up my first D&D experience. And I have only been in one other D&D group after this. Have anyone ever experienced something similar to this? It almost put me off the thoughts of wanting to get my hands near D&D again.

[Mystify]

Warning. A long post ahead. But I think it is worth the read. You might find yourself laughing, or shaking your head slightly. Keep in mind, this happened about.. two months ago, to a month ago. Any input would be muchly appreciated.


Wow. That sounds nothing like any D&D I have ever heard of. That is extraordinarily abnormal; don't let it color your perception of D&D. Beyond 'WTF', I have no clue what to think about that.

[Arbane]

So that pretty much sums up my first D&D experience. And I have only been in one other D&D group after this. Have anyone ever experienced something similar to this? It almost put me off the thoughts of wanting to get my hands near D&D again.

I'm happy to say I haven't experienced anything QUITE like that. :smalleek:

Those guys are bozos. Don't play with them again. Find other players who are less bozotic.

[ahenobarbi]

Warning. A long post ahead. But I think it is worth the read. You might find yourself laughing, or shaking your head slightly. Keep in mind, this happened about.. two months ago, to a month ago. Any input would be muchly appreciated.


Well there are many possible explanations for that story (the best for all involved parties (that I can think of) would be "DM is young and lacks experience (and is not a natural DMing prodigy). DM should get a lot of experience as a player before [s]he ever attempts DMing again").

Now, conclusion is only one: don't play with them. Really, find someone who is better at this.

[Venser]

Warning. A long post ahead. But I think it is worth the read. You might find yourself laughing, or shaking your head slightly. Keep in mind, this happened about.. two months ago, to a month ago. Any input would be muchly appreciated.



Level 4 rogue one shoted a pit fiend with a sneak attack ''directly to the brain'' without even rolling two 20s(If I saw two 20s, I would say ok)...an somehow he won a grapple check against it xD

[Coventry]

Then came the PVP ban.

As a DM, I ban PvP right up front.

I do not enjoy watching my friends fight each other.

If I am not enjoying the game that I am running, why am I bothering to run it?

As I result, I have banned some of the "better" barbarian prestige classes where the character could uncontrollably go berserk. Such is life.

[Mystify]

I allow PvP if it makes sense for the characters in the situation. "I'm jealous of your loot" does not satisfy those conditions.

[Dairuga]

Thank you all for the comments and input. I am quite glad that such a good number of people actually bothered to read it. Yes, it... gave me a rather bad taste for D&D, I will admit. But I have been in one group since then, and that have severly brightened my outlook on it, even if we have only had a few sessions.


Well there are many possible explanations for that story (the best for all involved parties (that I can think of) would be "DM is young and lacks experience (and is not a natural DMing prodigy). DM should get a lot of experience as a player before [s]he ever attempts DMing again").

Now, conclusion is only one: don't play with them. Really, find someone who is better at this.

That is the thing, you see. He claims to have DM'd for -years-. All the way since 2nd edition. He says he have a character that have been incorporated into the official D&D lore, named "Dirge". Not that I actually believe that anymore, but yes.

Oh, and another gem I forgot to mention. The cleric, from the first party. He ended up killing the party. And the fun part was? He was exposed to "Detect Evil", and he turned up as -good-. I asked how that was possible, as murdering the party would be a rather evil act, and the DM's best friend explained that "An evil cleric that worships an evil god is treated as good. Because he believes what he does is good, and he does what his god wants, which is good. Sure, murdering might be evil, but he follows his god's way, and in the eyes of his god, it's considered a good thing to do. Hence, a good act. So the cleric is treated as good."

... THe sad part was that I played with 8 or so people. And they made all of us believe that this was real. fully-wolly tournament legal and so on and so forth. TSR-sanctioned and TSR-real (Whatever TSR means, I am still not sure). But yes.. Luckily, the second group managed to knock some sense into my head.

[Lonely Tylenol]

Oh, and another gem I forgot to mention. The cleric, from the first party. He ended up killing the party. And the fun part was? He was exposed to "Detect Evil", and he turned up as -good-. I asked how that was possible, as murdering the party would be a rather evil act, and the DM's best friend explained that "An evil cleric that worships an evil god is treated as good. Because he believes what he does is good, and he does what his god wants, which is good. Sure, murdering might be evil, but he follows his god's way, and in the eyes of his god, it's considered a good thing to do. Hence, a good act. So the cleric is treated as good."

Oh, I get it! Your party was playing in Bizarro World (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bizarro_World).

Right?

...Right?

[Dairuga]

Oh, I get it! Your party was playing in Bizarro World (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bizarro_World).

Right?

...Right?



You my good sir, just made my day. Haha, thank you.
The Bizarro world of Ravenloft; I believe? I recall them using that name a few times. Undeads running around everywhere, the realm of evil; where no good-aligned creature would survive as all the evil of the world would hunt them down, I think it was.

[Studoku]

... THe sad part was that I played with 8 or so people. And they made all of us believe that this was real. fully-wolly tournament legal and so on and so forth. TSR-sanctioned and TSR-real (Whatever TSR means, I am still not sure). But yes.. Luckily, the second group managed to knock some sense into my head.
TSR (Tactical Studies Rules) was the company founded by Gary Gygax. It produced serveral games- D&D being the most noteworthy.

However, it collapsed and was sold to Wizards of the Coast. Consequently, it had nothing to do with D&D 3/3.5. TSR-sanctioned and TSR-real mean nothing. Tournament legal means even less in 3.5- I know there's a system for it in 4e but I didn't think 3.5 did that stuff.

That group really can't be considered to be playing any edition of D&D. I'd consider it free-form with D&D words and the occasional dice.

[huttj509]

You my good sir, just made my day. Haha, thank you.
The Bizarro world of Ravenloft; I believe? I recall them using that name a few times. Undeads running around everywhere, the realm of evil; where no good-aligned creature would survive as all the evil of the world would hunt them down, I think it was.

Ravenloft is not Bizarro world.

Ravenloft is Gothic Horror world. Dracula, Frankenstein, the Island of Dr. Moreau, ghost stories, werewolves, hereditary curses, and the legendary Donotgonearthe Castle. All rolled into one.

Good does exist there. Good does not rule there. Every town may have a dark secret, and the unknown is to be feared. For whatever reason the powers in control of Ravenloft have secluded truely evil persons there. Given them their own domains, which grant them power and torment at the same time (for example the lich Azalin sought magic power, he has great control over undead, but can never learn ANY new magic, and is also tormented by the ghost of his son, whose bones he's using).

[rmg22893]

I have a rather hilarious DnD "DM ineptitude" story. So we start out in a tavern. All of the doors are locked and sentient, telling us to stay in the main room (railroading at its finest). We then find a "Wand of Orgasmic Effects" and a "Wand of Turn Things Pink". Hilarity ensues. Then this magical elf-lady shows up, casts save-less sleep on all of us, and we were sold into slavery. Except two of us were elven, so we became her servants to the end of our days.

End campaign.

[SilverLeaf167]

I have a rather hilarious DnD "DM ineptitude" story. So we start out in a tavern. All of the doors are locked and sentient, telling us to stay in the main room (railroading at its finest). We then find a "Wand of Orgasmic Effects" and a "Wand of Turn Things Pink". Hilarity ensues. Then this magical elf-lady shows up, casts save-less sleep on all of us, and we were sold into slavery. Except two of us were elven, so we became her servants to the end of our days.

End campaign.
I... have no idea what happened here. Though I think I've heard this story somewhere before.
It doesn't really sound like the DM was incompetent, most likely he was just playing out some stupid joke.

[Dairuga]

TSR (Tactical Studies Rules) was the company founded by Gary Gygax. It produced serveral games- D&D being the most noteworthy.

However, it collapsed and was sold to Wizards of the Coast. Consequently, it had nothing to do with D&D 3/3.5. TSR-sanctioned and TSR-real mean nothing. Tournament legal means even less in 3.5- I know there's a system for it in 4e but I didn't think 3.5 did that stuff.

That group really can't be considered to be playing any edition of D&D. I'd consider it free-form with D&D words and the occasional dice.

Ah, I understand.. Thank you kindly for explaining that. It is a relief to finally understand where it came from. And now I can safely say that what they spouted was nothing more than inane nonsense, as Tactical studies Rules do not own D&D anymoer... much less founded the 3.5 edition rules, which we allegedly played by.

Yes... Free-form D&D with words and occational dice sounds appropriate. Where arguing with the D&D warrants you being called "Corrupted" and thrown out of the group, and agreeing and having fun with the DM warrants you being called a skileld player. Looking back, that group was nothing but.. well, yes. It was bad. Truly bad. I hope that other people won't ever have to experience that again.

[Dairuga]

I have a rather hilarious DnD "DM ineptitude" story. So we start out in a tavern. All of the doors are locked and sentient, telling us to stay in the main room (railroading at its finest). We then find a "Wand of Orgasmic Effects" and a "Wand of Turn Things Pink". Hilarity ensues. Then this magical elf-lady shows up, casts save-less sleep on all of us, and we were sold into slavery. Except two of us were elven, so we became her servants to the end of our days.

End campaign.

Oh god, yes. That is.. Just. Yes. The group I were in, always made characters which had stats of "Yes", the DM said. One elf lady we met had charisma of "YES". If she did anything, like say, persuasion; we had nothing we could say in the matter. We would follow whatever she said. And "Thud", which was a golem. It had 52 in strenght, was of colossal size, and had an intelligence of "No". He was so stupid, that magic failed to affect him. He was so stupid that magic simply failed to affect him, the DM said.

But yes. As the previous guy said, that sounds more like a silly joke than anything else. I don't see how anyone could possibly do anything against that, or even win the situation. I hope you did not waste an entire session / evening on that.

[rmg22893]

Oh god, yes. That is.. Just. Yes. The group I were in, always made characters which had stats of "Yes", the DM said. One elf lady we met had charisma of "YES". If she did anything, like say, persuasion; we had nothing we could say in the matter. We would follow whatever she said. And "Thud", which was a golem. It had 52 in strenght, was of colossal size, and had an intelligence of "No". He was so stupid, that magic failed to affect him. He was so stupid that magic simply failed to affect him, the DM said.

But yes. As the previous guy said, that sounds more like a silly joke than anything else. I don't see how anyone could possibly do anything against that, or even win the situation. I hope you did not waste an entire session / evening on that.

No, it lasted all of a half hour, and then we never let him DM again.

[Dairuga]

No, it lasted all of a half hour, and then we never let him DM again.

Good to hear, good to hear. AS much as I enjoy the occational joke, it would not be fun to set up an entire game, get up expectations, and then just.. pull a bottle of Fukitol and not give them a chance to actually play.

[rmg22893]

Good to hear, good to hear. AS much as I enjoy the occational joke, it would not be fun to set up an entire game, get up expectations, and then just.. pull a bottle of Fukitol and not give them a chance to actually play.

I'm fairly certain the DM was looking at naughty photos the entire time, so that would explain a lot.

[Ravellion]

Wow. That sounds nothing like any D&D I have ever heard of. That is extraordinarily abnormal; don't let it color your perception of D&D. Beyond 'WTF', I have no clue what to think about that.
In this case, I think a simple "I agree" post is fully worth the bandwidth. That ... game... I have no words...
:eek:

[CIDE]

The only suitable response to most of those stories: "Wow".

As far as PvP goes it's allowed in every game I play in as long as it fits the characters. No one gets bent out of shape once we realize that it's the characters for in character reasons doing these things rather than the player for out of character reasons.

Hell, in one game my character had done nothing but piss off one of her party members and even scare him because of her powers. So when he ultimately screwed her over and left her at the bottom of a monster infested pitch black pit with no ways of getting out and no light (and his alignment was by no means good) it was completely believable.

I don't use that character anymore in that campaign but she got out of it (it's a VERY long story). And currently she's hunting that guy down.

In an Everquest d20 game the situation is dire enough that several characters hate each other but are required to work together just to get out of it alive. Though, EVERYONE loves the Dwarf in the group. Anyway, it hasn't really been PvP but through play the thief has stolen quite a bit of stuff from everyone. Which I imagine will get interesting once we all corner him with "petty" things like that once things calm down.

There's been a few more close-calls with potential pvp too. But it was all a reasonable part of the play.

[Hyde]

@Dairuga

So your first group couldn't... read, is what you mean.

It sounds like you figured out all their bull****, so I'm not going to worry with the explanations about where they pulled everything from.

...The best thing about this is "TSR Legal".

What you might not know is that TSR is the first publisher of DnD as we know it, but they haven't been involved with DnD (or been a company) for awhile now. Wizards of the Coast bought the license for the game as of 3rd ed, iirc, so all their rules may have been "TSR Legal", but since it's not a TSR game, I'm gonna say it doesn't much matter.

If that rambling nonsense there makes any sense.

[Lonely Tylenol]

Oh god, yes. That is.. Just. Yes. The group I were in, always made characters which had stats of "Yes", the DM said. One elf lady we met had charisma of "YES". If she did anything, like say, persuasion; we had nothing we could say in the matter. We would follow whatever she said. And "Thud", which was a golem. It had 52 in strenght, was of colossal size, and had an intelligence of "No". He was so stupid, that magic failed to affect him. He was so stupid that magic simply failed to affect him, the DM said.

But yes. As the previous guy said, that sounds more like a silly joke than anything else. I don't see how anyone could possibly do anything against that, or even win the situation. I hope you did not waste an entire session / evening on that.

I'm scared.

Somebody hold me.

[Hyde]

Well, if you're ever in my area of the cosmos, you're welcome to come play with us. If only because I want to hear more about this ridiculousness.

[uncool]

Just as a note, PvP D&D can be done really really well. It's something to take care around, but it can make sense. For those who have several hours of free time (if you don't, do not under any circumstances click the link; you will have trouble stopping reading) and want to read D&D at its best:

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=116836
=Uncool-

[mikau013]

Tournament legal means even less in 3.5- I know there's a system for it in 4e but I didn't think 3.5 did that stuff.


That depends, do you include things like living greyhawk?

[SirFredgar]

I don't outright ban PvP, but I explain it's a no-no, and that if attempted in-game.... someone will find out. With divination magic, it's not hard at all to figure out what happened to Hector the Flayed.

However, I only discourage PvP in my games because the players are never generally equal. We don't use point buy, so base stats can be skewed. I admit, when I GM I don't always keep the best track of WBL, so one player may have more gear/money then another. Usually they are about the same, but one of my players knows that WBL is actually another class feature, and shops accordingly (for good touch AC, saves, immunities, transportation, all the nifties you need to be awesome), while my other players seem to just buy whatever is shiniest at the moment.

I might be more open to it if everything were equal, as in point buy and a certain gold threashold for the encounter.... but it's really hard to micomanage that in a 1-20 campaign over several levels of gameplay with 5 people. If I set up an arena style system, I'd be fine with it.... but straight up PvP gets borning.