Worst thing ever?

[Kelb_Panthera]

I just saw this video https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6-HWr8BqXHc and found myself immensely disgusted. Does anyone think that reaction is too much or was this guy just plain wrong/

[Blackhawk748]

I just saw this video https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6-HWr8BqXHc and found myself immensely disgusted. Does anyone think that reaction is too much or was this guy just plain wrong/

Ill be honest, i stopped watching when his example of OP was "chucking a 20d6 Fireball". So i got like 4 minutes in. :smalltongue:

[torrasque666]

Ill be honest, i stopped watching when his example of OP was "chucking a 20d6 Fireball". So i got like 4 minutes in. :smalltongue:
I think that was meant as a more basic example of "encounter ending ability" After all, not everyone is going to understand mass no-save-just-die optimization. But everyone understands damage.

[AvatarVecna]

As is almsot a mantra around here, "OoC problems should be dealt with OoC". Here's an easy three-step solution to having an OP character:

1) Ask the optimizer to either tone down their character to match the group's power level or find a way to help the others build powerful characters; some optimizers like to help others optimize, and a party operating at low T2/high T3 is better than a T4 party with an optimized T2.

2) Ask the optimizer to optimize in a way that doesn't steal the spotlight as obviously, usually by filling a support role of some kind, such as buffing or BFC.

3) If the optimizer refuses to not have their overpowered character steal the show from his less powerful allies, I would not imagine the player would be very welcome for much longer; "ask" them to leave the game.

Now, let's say step 3 isn't viable long-term, for whatever reason (they're the only one who can host the game right now, for instance); this is the point where OoC solutions no longer suffice: the player won't leave, they won't tone it down, and they won't play a background character no matter how powerful. At this point, because you are being forced to share your relaxing game session with a person that makes it not relaxing at all, so share your misery: it's time to take this OoC conflict IC, because they left you no other choice. It's not honorable by any stretch of the imagination, but there's not much he'll be able to do if you engage in a game of oneupmanship; they will have limited resources...and you will not; they will need DM approval...you will not.

[Kelb_Panthera]

The messed up part is that it sounds like what the DM that prompted him to do this video was talking about is a bog-standard druid that's simply using its class features.

[Extra Anchovies]

Lightning bolt and fireball. Those are the two, pretty much the most powerful spells in the game, in terms of doing raw damage.
http://i.imgur.com/mXyupD1.gif

Here are my thoughts on the speaker's various suggested approaches. For clarity's sake, "the munchkin" here refers to the character that's been causing problems.

A person's reputation is heavily influenced by those of the people they associate with. If the PCs go around killing innocents, they'll all get a negative reputation for killing innocents regardless of which PC was most responsible for the deaths. If the PCs stick to killing monsters and outlaws (or other non-innocents, e.g. invading armies), they won't get a negative reputation.

The enemies attracted by wanted posters and bounties either will be strong enough to kill the PC (in which case it's "rocks fall, everybody dies"), or they won't be (in which case it's free XP and gold for the party).

Time spent showing off how much you made your NPCs hate the munchkin, or time spent sending bounty hunters after the munchkin, is time devoted to developing the munchkin's story and only the munchkin's story (or at least developing their character's power). Making the munchkin the main character (or at least the one getting the most time in the spotlight) is hardly a solution to the munchkin's apparent desire to be the main character.

A bounty of sufficient size to get the PCs to turn against one of their own makes sense in-universe, but is inherently flawed from a metagame perspective. If the other players have an issue with the munchkin, they won't need a bounty to want him gone. If the other players don't have an issue with the munchkin, then there's no reason to remove the munchkin (and they're probably not a munchkin at all, or at least not a disruptive one).

The stuff about hostile environments is just a list of fancy ways to say "rocks fall, everybody dies".

Killing the munchkin won't work, though, because they can keep making virtually identical characters, over and over, until you talk to them outside of the game and ask them to stop.

I do like that they eventually get around to suggesting that the DM talk one-on-one with the munchkin and ask them to tone down their character.

"Your trick is cool, but it's not right for this game" is generally the best way to deal with a disruptive character.
"You're having fun, but the others aren't" is generally the best way to deal with a disruptive player.
"I'm sorry, but I'm going to stop inviting you to the sessions" is generally the best way to deal with a disruptive player (or the player of a disruptive character) who refuses to change.

[ComaVision]

The last time I watched a D&D video on YouTube, I got in an argument with the video creator about how the monk isn't overpowered. Sometimes you just need to remember there aren't any prerequisites to uploading a video.

[Tajerio]

The last time I watched a D&D video on YouTube, I got in an argument with the video creator about how the monk isn't overpowered. Sometimes you just need to remember there aren't any prerequisites to uploading a video.

And Blathering Idiot is the favored class of YouTube posters.

[Crake]

Ill be honest, i stopped watching when his example of OP was "chucking a 20d6 Fireball". So i got like 4 minutes in. :smalltongue:

To be fair, he wasn't saying he thought that was OP, he was saying that there are people out there who want to do that, and only that, without regard for what else is going on. For example, if the party comes across a group of bandits, he will just throw out the fireballs without letting say, the party bard try to diplomacy them, and maybe even get some information about them.

[Florian]

To be fair, he wasn't saying he thought that was OP, he was saying that there are people out there who want to do that, and only that, without regard for what else is going on. For example, if the party comes across a group of bandits, he will just throw out the fireballs without letting say, the party bard try to diplomacy them, and maybe even get some information about them.

I once played with a guy who combined two very annoying traits:
- If you can optimize something, it´s your full right to do so, even if the rest of the group is annoyed by that.
- If you play a full casting class, you define yourself by casting and only the highest level/hardest hitting spells are fun. Why have the Bard talk when you can dominate?

We asked him to change or leave, he promised to change, but did´t, so, well....

[Krazzman]

First offender: Breaking their neck in a pittrap? WTF? When have pittraps ever done that?

The main problem is that at least I already start on a whole other page of DMing than he does.

When problems arise in a session, I or better said we talk with the "offending" party. Is the game even fun anymore for the Magus? Is there something wrong? Something bothering him or not.
You don't give the PC bad reputation for bein a bit toxic... all this passive agressive bull is just wrong.

[atemu1234]

First offender: Breaking their neck in a pittrap? WTF? When have pittraps ever done that?

The main problem is that at least I already start on a whole other page of DMing than he does.

When problems arise in a session, I or better said we talk with the "offending" party. Is the game even fun anymore for the Magus? Is there something wrong? Something bothering him or not.
You don't give the PC bad reputation for bein a bit toxic... all this passive agressive bull is just wrong.

This. OoC problems should be solved OoC, and this is an abuse of power.

[Strigon]

Watch "the circumstances" be against him, like, one room after the other until he dies.

There we go. Problem solved; we've gotten rid of the dirty, OP, greataxe-heaving fighter, and that was the source of the problem. That player will not feel cheated at all, and will certainly make a more reasonable player now, like a Wizard that focuses on conjuration. No hard feelings, and the important thing is the game - not our social circle - remains wholly intact.

[Eldariel]

I just checked an earlier video of his (should we really be giving him views?) where he complains about being stuck with 4 "powergamers" one of whom was a Sorcerer who could cast Fireball 64 times a day and one was a Warlock - apparently Warlocks are intrinsically broken because Eldritch Blast is "almost Fireball". And "powergamers" apparently only care about numbers - his definition of the term "powergamer" hits the Stormwind Fallacy hard in assuming that caring about the crunch and caring about the fluff are somehow mutually exclusive. So it seems to me he's a prisoner of his own preferences (his message seems to be "my way of playing is the only right way") who doesn't really understand the system on a very deep level.

He's sadly not alone: it's all too common to run into DMs/players with lots of tacit assumptions on how the game should be played with poor mastery of the rules and no desire to study them in more depth (nothing wrong with house rules or interpretations if one is aware they're such), and with the fundamental assumption that "everybody is either with me or wrong". Of course, this kind of thinking is both problematic and common in a much wider scope than just D&D, but here the D&D dimension is the relevant part. And whose solution to different expectations and assumptions in the table is to screw the others over in-game - that is, committing the cardinal sin of bringing metagame matters into the game (ironically, the very same people are often the first to accuse others of "metagaming", though using the word in a different sense).


In short, I'm not surprised that the informative content of a video is poor when:

1. An assumption of players only ever caring about only one of fluff or crunch underlies the video.

2. An assumption of one right way of playing underlies the video.

3. The argumentation is based on an incomplete understanding of the game system it is intended to consider.

4. The proposed solution to mediating disputes and different expectations between the players is to harass the dissenting player within the game system.

[torrasque666]

Are we sure he's not a certain force-wielding artisan?

[Âmesang]

Do or do not; only a Jedi deals in absolutes. :smalltongue:

[Bronk]

Oh man. So I watched the whole thing, and it was, well, it wasn't as terrible as I thought it was going to be, but man does he play up to the whole gamer stereotype. It was also, at 31 minutes, about 26 minutes too long.

He did bring up just talking to the player, but he buried it at number five on his long winded list, and when he did bring it up, it was to say 'build me a person', which sounds great and all, but he explained that what he meant was to force people to choose their feats and skills almost at random, which never makes sense for an adventurer, either in character or out of character.

He definitely seems to have a thing against fireball, and someone who could cast a 20d6 fireball clearly wronged him in the past.

Also, yeah, he seems to have a thing against druids. If a druid wants to ride a bear, why not? He's a druid! That's a basic class feature!

I also find it funny that he's telling people who play characters he considers to be overpowered to go play World of Warcraft while he's sitting in front of a bookcase full of 4.0 books.

I did notice that this was number 49 in a series... are any of his other ones any good?

[Zanos]

I enjoyed that the example given was to have the character get a bad reputation...for killing bandits. :smallconfused:

[Kelb_Panthera]

I enjoyed that the example given was to have the character get a bad reputation...for killing bandits. :smallconfused:

Ya know, I completely missed that, somehow, in light of the fact that it was such a bad piece of advice in general.

[Elandris Kajar]

Also, the lightning bolt thing is patently ridiculous. Apparently if he is throwing lightning bolts (which aren't really op) then the proper way to deal is have him get wet from some source.
Then, when he tries doing what he is supposed to do-casting spells- punish him for the lightning bolt be having it electrocute him. This works because "just like flesh, water conducts electricity, so if you shoot a lightning bolt from your finger,your guy will kill himself". The failed logic here is truly extraordinary, at least to me.

[Marlowe]

I enjoyed that the example given was to have the character get a bad reputation...for killing bandits. :smallconfused:

Now that is it.
https://media.giphy.com/media/3oEdv9X1LoT5RSWAbm/giphy.gif

[Segev]

Even if your get a reputation for using excessive force against bandits, that should mostly just make you feared, not hated. That lies at the level of, "Oh, um, hello, Fireballsplodicus, um, Sir. Please, we--we don't want any trouble here. Um. How can we help you?" not "Grab the torches and pitchforks, and run him out of down," nor "Fireballsplodicus is coming! Quick, get a high-level NPC to save us!" Because Fireballsplodicus hasn't demonstrated a tendency to level towns...yet. They just...hope theirs isn't the precedent-setter.

[Bronk]

I just checked an earlier video of his (should we really be giving him views?) where he complains about being stuck with 4 "powergamers" one of whom was a Sorcerer who could cast Fireball 64 times a day and one was a Warlock - apparently Warlocks are intrinsically broken because Eldritch Blast is "almost Fireball". And "powergamers" apparently only care about numbers - his definition of the term "powergamer" hits the Stormwind Fallacy hard in assuming that caring about the crunch and caring about the fluff are somehow mutually exclusive. So it seems to me he's a prisoner of his own preferences (his message seems to be "my way of playing is the only right way") who doesn't really understand the system on a very deep level.

He's sadly not alone: it's all too common to run into DMs/players with lots of tacit assumptions on how the game should be played with poor mastery of the rules ...

Right? I'm trying to watch number 11 too, since it's linked to the side, and he's basically sad that he had a bad first time DMing, was angry at base classes, was worried about power gaming at level 7, and, I guess, still proud, years later, that he doesn't know the rules very well?

I mean, 'oh no, a fighter took feats', and 'oh no, the rogue's player want's to make sure his DM knows how his main combat class feature works... Crazy!

[frogglesmash]

Listening to 11 as well, and it seems that any time the players behave tactically, know the rules, or use a spell/class feature they are power gamers. It's like he'd prefer to DM a party of destitute Warriors.

[Blackhawk748]

Listening to 11 as well, and it seems that any time the players behave tactically, know the rules, or use a spell/class feature they are power gamers. It's like he'd prefer to DM a party of destitute Warriors.

Ya, he is definitely playing the wrong game.

[RolkFlameraven]

decided to try and sit through 11, couldn't do it. This guy comes off as an elitist jackass who doesn't even know the rules of the game he is being an elitist jackass about.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Dammit, now I'm going to have to see what everyone's talking about with video 11.

[Blackhawk748]

Dammit, now I'm going to have to see what everyone's talking about with video 11.

Don't do it. I haven't even seen it but i can tell you it isnt worth it. This guy is a tool. And its not even because he doesn't play it "like us" its because hes got this DM vs Party mentality and thats really, really bad. I've been in games like that as a player (one of which i happened to actually win oddly enough) and they are not fun. Ok trolling that particular DM was fun, but its not my proudest moment, though to be fair, he started it. :smalltongue:

[Shnigda]

Just watched the whole of episode 11... That guy is an absolute PILLOCK! He seemed to get cross about people figuring out his traps immediately and a Rogue disarming other traps (which is what they do) and said Rogue using their main class feature. He also seemed to get mad about a fighter putting 18 into their strength rather than CHA (because obviously a fighter is super duper charismatic and should never be particularly strong...)
Generally a complete waste of time, but also makes me glad my DM isn't this awful

EDIT: Also, he complains about the fighter getting Dragonsbane on his sword and a potion of cold protection, knowing that he was just about to fight a silver dragon... How on earth is that Powergaming!?

[Marlowe]

This guy's not going to turn out to be somebody who's already been banned from here; right?

[torrasque666]

This guy's not going to turn out to be somebody who's already been banned from here; right?
I already noted that a few posts ago. My Orcus​ sense is tingling.

[Kelb_Panthera]

This guy's not going to turn out to be somebody who's already been banned from here; right?


I already noted that a few posts ago. My Orcus​ sense is tingling.

Wait..... does anybody who remebers the rudisplorker remember his linguistic pattern clearly enough to compare it to this guy? I'm suddenly feeling a bit of deja vu.

[Marlowe]

Well~how somebody speaks on camera isn't really much of an indicator of how they write.

For example, I frequently sound like a complete moron in normal conversation-

Okay. Bad example. More importantly, it's not as though Harry Basketweaver was a singular paradigm of balloon-headed insanity. He just was one that got lots of people's attention because he wouldn't go away.

One of these people seem to surface every few months. Many of them don't even get banned but just drift away, occasionally turning up later to repeat like a bad fish dinner. We're currently living in the age of Mr "Wearing clothes is unrealistic" and Mr "Everyone who disagrees with me is Evil and must be killed out of hand", and I still remember the balmy days of Mr "Probability is a conspiracy by the man".

[Kelb_Panthera]

Well~how somebody speaks on camera isn't really much of an indicator of how they write.

For example, I frequently sound like a complete moron in normal conversation-

Okay. Bad example. More importantly, it's not as though Harry Basketweaver was a singular paradigm of balloon-headed insanity. He just was one that got lots of people's attention because he wouldn't go away.

One of these people seem to surface every few months. Many of them don't even get banned but just drift away, occasionally turning up later to repeat like a bad fish dinner. We're currently living in the age of Mr "Wearing clothes is unrealistic" and Mr "Everyone who disagrees with me is Evil and must be killed out of hand", and I still remember the balmy days of Mr "Probability is a conspiracy by the man".

Oh gods, I think I remember that last one. Sometimes these people make my brain hurt.

[Strigon]

Oh gods, I think I remember that last one. Sometimes these people make my brain hurt.

I can't decide if I'm sorry I wasn't here to be a part of this discussion, or glad I missed out on it.

What does it even mean when someone thinks probability is a conspiracy?

[atemu1234]

Well~how somebody speaks on camera isn't really much of an indicator of how they write.

For example, I frequently sound like a complete moron in normal conversation-

Okay. Bad example. More importantly, it's not as though Harry Basketweaver was a singular paradigm of balloon-headed insanity. He just was one that got lots of people's attention because he wouldn't go away.

One of these people seem to surface every few months. Many of them don't even get banned but just drift away, occasionally turning up later to repeat like a bad fish dinner. We're currently living in the age of Mr "Wearing clothes is unrealistic" and Mr "Everyone who disagrees with me is Evil and must be killed out of hand", and I still remember the balmy days of Mr "Probability is a conspiracy by the man".

Please pm me who these people are/were.

[RolkFlameraven]

Honestly I would like to know too. I only remember the force user from Hogwarts and the Sorcerer who didn't wear shirts and while both of them could fit whom you have described I don't think its them.

[Kelb_Panthera]

I can't decide if I'm sorry I wasn't here to be a part of this discussion, or glad I missed out on it.

Probably better you missed it. I'm as even tempered as they come and I got scrubbed.


What does it even mean when someone thinks probability is a conspiracy?

I have no idea. He was convinced that higher mathematics as a whole was bunk, I think. Sometimes people do that with things they can't wrap their head around.

[Strigon]

I have no idea. He was convinced that higher mathematics as a whole was bunk, I think. Sometimes people do that with things they can't wrap their head around.

Wait, wait, wait; he didn't think his misfortune was as a result of a conspiracy, he though probability itself was a conspiracy? As in, nothing is truly random?
That's... quite a theory. Isn't the internet marvelous?

In any case, he (the guy from the video) certainly doesn't seem to be nearly as bad as the horror stories I've managed to piece together - or occasionally see - in the playground. It sounds like he's just suffering from narrow-mindedness, confirmation bias, and lack of system mastery. And a couple odd beliefs, like thinking that putting your highest score into your most important ability is the worst sort of powergaming.

Can you imagine playing a properly optimized Wizard with this guy, though?
"A Wizard... you've got pretty high Intelligence; I'm not sure I want to play with a power gamer again..."
"Power gamer? I would never! Look, I don't even know fireball!"

[AvatarVecna]

"Power gamer? I would never! Look, I don't even know fireball!"

That's...that's a sig-worthy quite right there. You mind if I sig it?

[Blackhawk748]

Can you imagine playing a properly optimized Wizard with this guy, though?
"A Wizard... you've got pretty high Intelligence; I'm not sure I want to play with a power gamer again..."
"Power gamer? I would never! Look, I don't even know fireball!"

Oh the things i could do with a Sorcerer would blow this guy's mind.

"Fireball? Nah i've only got Glitterdust....Glitterdust for daaaayssss."

[Strigon]

That's...that's a sig-worthy quite right there. You mind if I sig it?

I would be honoured to be sigged.

[Draconium]

I... Just... Why? Why is this a thing that exists?

I couldn't even finish the video. I mean, as has been said already, OOC problems should be settled OOC. And this guy's definition of "OP" and powergamer" seems... skewed, to drastically understate it. I mean, I like slinging around double digits of d6's of damage myself, but even I know that blasting is a very underwhelming tactic compared to most of the other stuff spellcasters can pull off. And while Druids are pretty powerful, I don't think necessarily being one that uses their class features is so drastically overpowered to warrant a response. And it's obvious that he doesn't know how the game works (you can't get 20d6 on a normal Fireball, for one...), despite how he acts otherwise.

And then I look through what you guys have said... And I'm glad I never personally had to deal with some of the caricatures of insanity you all seem to be referring too...

[Inevitability]

Honestly I would like to know too. I only remember the force user from Hogwarts and the Sorcerer who didn't wear shirts and while both of them could fit whom you have described I don't think its them.

Maybe we should create a thread where the greatest forum madmen are immortalized forever? You know, lest others make the same mistakes.

[Deophaun]

Wait, wait, wait; he didn't think his misfortune was as a result of a conspiracy, he though probability itself was a conspiracy? As in, nothing is truly random?
That's... quite a theory. Isn't the internet marvelous?
Yup. I remember that guy. While we may laughingly talk about how the dice are out to get us, he was convinced it was the literal truth. Somehow, the dice just knew what they needed to do for you to fail. Only hit on a 20? Probability guarantees that the dice will roll a 20 whenever it matters. It. Was. A. Trip.

Anyway, I got to where it said "Published on Sep 4, 2013" and realized that whatever rabid, poorly-typed rant I posted in the YouTube comments wouldn't be read. I mean, honestly, what's the point?

[Arcanist]

I enjoyed that the example given was to have the character get a bad reputation...for killing bandits. :smallconfused:

Well maybe a bad reputation among bandits? Maybe they're a big world spanning organization that mostly does banditry or something? Heck, maybe these guys are like the Blackram from Blade and Soul and have their own fleet or something ridiculous like that.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Maybe we should create a thread where the greatest forum madmen are immortalized forever? You know, lest others make the same mistakes.

That would be awesome but I'm pretty sure it's against forum rules. Hell, I think we're probably skirting a little close as it is.

Also, I watched about half of episode 11 before I had a stupid spazm and slapped the tablet screen to make it stop. Dear gods. Why? Yeah, he had one cheater but the other three were nothing out of the ordinary. Christ, he couldn't even remember that a warlock's magic is called invocations.

[Deophaun]

Watching episode 11 now.

"They were basically racists and were against the daughter's relationship with Mazadache even though he was a silver dragon and silver dragons are Good."

Yeah, I'm enjoying the lack of self-awareness.

Edit: "I was waiting for the sorcerer to start lobbing fireballs at Mazadache while the others were fighting him, but he knows what's up and not doing that because he's a powergamer, so he stands back and ineffectually tries to hit him with his crossbow."

Oh, this is gold.

[Esprit15]

*shudder* Just fragments on video 11 were painful to watch. "The rogue was trying to sneak attack everything he could," "The wizard or sorcerer wanted his best stat to be Charisma so he could get all his spells as fast as possible," "The fighter was a half orc." This guy is scared of a halfly competent party. Not even an optimized party, just a competent party. The party I DM would probably scare him, just because of the Stone Giant in it (funny enough, one of the best role players in the party as well).

[ben-zayb]

Now, I'm not exactly below average on the jerkmeter (although I seem to be ascending the fun-police all-time-best list), but what's the point of this thread again? It seems to me we're just repeating what we've already said and known about a dozen or so times in this forum and patting each other on the back, which isn't useless per se especially when you are trying to engage in a conversation with the new person you are trying to share these perspectives with, except this time the new person isn't even here (or am I mistaken and someone did give out an invitation?) to possibly understand where we're coming from.


Although, okay, I occassionally enjoy reminiscing about some trainwreck threads from banned posters too, so there's likely some sort of hypocrisy in this post anyway.

[Kelb_Panthera]

As long as the conversation persists, such as it is, it can serve as a highlight of some behavior that desperately needs avoiding.

It's not entirely clear whether this belongs here or in the media discussions section but I felt it fit better here for the reason I stated above. If it was more general, rather than being focused on 3rd edition, I'd've probably put it there instead.

[Marlowe]

but what's the point of this thread again?

The point? Simple.

Someone is implicitly arrogating to themselves the position of Expert on a subject in which we are interested by posting a series of videos on the aforesaid subject.

That person, while apparently regarding himself as one qualified to make objective judgements on said subject, is demonstrating both massive unconscious bias and a hilarious level of ignorance.

The OP posted this to ask, fairly enough, if others in the community agreed with his estimation of the aforesaid individual and his works.

TL:DL:

1, "This guy thinks he's an expert."
2, "This guy strikes me as quite the opposite."
3, "IS IT JUST ME?"

Point 3 is a perfectly reasonable (indeed, expected) use for this type of forum. I would argue that points 1 and 2 taken together make for a worthwhile subject as well.

Happy? It's not "Let's make fun of the idiot". It's "the idiot is telling other people to be idiots in a tone of authority. Avoid him."

[Malak'ai]

For example, I frequently sound like a complete moron in normal conversation-

Only if the other person doesn't know what you're on about... Or doesn't have a dictonary on hand :smalltongue:.

At least the guy in the vid isn't G, and he seems (from the few miniutes I watched) to know (but maybe not accept) that different people have different play styles, so he's certainly not JP :smallbiggrin:.

[Blackhawk748]

*shudder* Just fragments on video 11 were painful to watch. "The rogue was trying to sneak attack everything he could," "The wizard or sorcerer wanted his best stat to be Charisma so he could get all his spells as fast as possible," "The fighter was a half orc." This guy is scared of a halfly competent party. Not even an optimized party, just a competent party. The party I DM would probably scare him, just because of the Stone Giant in it (funny enough, one of the best role players in the party as well).

Just imagine what he'd do if he ever saw a Lion Spirit Totem Barbarian, he'd probably explode lol

[AvatarVecna]

Just imagine what he'd do if he ever saw a Lion Spirit Totem Barbarian, he'd probably explode lol

"All good saves, super-high Ac (including Touch), a pile of immunities, 7 attacks a round, 2d10 base damage weapon? Monks are so overpowered!"

[Strigon]

Really I think all of his issues could be solved - or at least made bearable - if he were more humble or open-minded.
I.E., perhaps it's possible someone can like having a decent character and roleplaying.
Perhaps it's possible that someone who doesn't care about roleplaying can still have fun in D&D.
Perhaps it's possible being awake for character creation isn't equal to powergaming, and I just need to have encounters to match.

[Esprit15]

Really I think all of his issues could be solved - or at least made bearable - if he were more humble or open-minded.
I.E., perhaps it's possible someone can like having a decent character and roleplaying.
Perhaps it's possible that someone who doesn't care about roleplaying can still have fun in D&D.
Perhaps it's possible being awake for character creation isn't equal to powergaming, and I just need to have encounters to match.

Yeah. I would personally be happy to have a party that can optimize a little. It would mean I can be a little more aggressive in encounter design, playing their enemies intelligently.

[Eldariel]

I already noted that a few posts ago. My Orcus​ sense is tingling.

I highly doubt that - this fellow seems to have started in 3e while Orcus came about from a decidedly AD&D/OD&D background, all the way up to the 1% catastrophic failure chance on certain spells and such.

[Arael666]

Don't do it. I haven't even seen it but i can tell you it isnt worth it. This guy is a tool. And its not even because he doesn't play it "like us" its because hes got this DM vs Party mentality and thats really, really bad. I've been in games like that as a player (one of which i happened to actually win oddly enough) and they are not fun. Ok trolling that particular DM was fun, but its not my proudest moment, though to be fair, he started it. :smalltongue:

Ok, now you have to tell us this story.

[Arael666]

Please pm me who these people are/were.

when he pm's you, pm me to spread the word :smallwink:

[Blackhawk748]

Ok, now you have to tell us this story.

Oh fine, you twisted my arm :smalltongue:

This DM was very prone to bringing OOC problems IC, and to this end he wound up killing a fairly meh Tier 4-ish Sorcerer i had been playing, in what i still call to this day "a load of bull***t"

Anyway, i then went into building a new character with the thought of, he can't kill what he cant see. Say hello to Umbranus Shdowfell a Shadow Drow (yes i know i ate a bunch of LA, but i only had to buyoff 2 cuz he gave everyone 2 LA for free, his mistake)

The build was straightforward Rogue/Swashbuckler/Swordsage/Assassin he had like a +15 damage from Dex and Int with some not crap Str in there and was virtually invisible. I took Darkstalker and had some permanent Mindblank combined with a leadlined cloak and boom, almost impossible to see and any AoE he wants to throw needs to get throw my SR. Now im aware that there are AoE SR:No spells, but apparently he wasnt.

Another glorious thing about Umbranus was the DC 30 Death attack he was rocking, which was how i opened every encounter, usually on the squishy guy in a bathrobe. He eventually called it after i took out a dragon from 500 ft away with Ballista i had hidden and it failed its (massively lowered) fort save to not die.

The best part is, the rest of the party was behind me on this and did everything in their power to back me up, to this day we joke that Shadowfell has Bad DM:Bane as a racial property.

[Bronk]

Oh fine, you twisted my arm :smalltongue:


Whoa, it's like it's right out of Knights of the Dinner Table!

Quick question for the thread though... does anyone know of a youtube series like this that isn't terrible? I'd like to try some out that are fun to watch, and not so much like this one, or one I saw a bunch of years ago where some DM spent half an hour explaining that he likes to increase player interest by stealing their stuff.

[Malimar]

Quick question for the thread though... does anyone know of a youtube series like this that isn't terrible? I'd like to try some out that are fun to watch, and not so much like this one, or one I saw a bunch of years ago where some DM spent half an hour explaining that he likes to increase player interest by stealing their stuff.

There are tons of decent to good D&D blogs. I don't know of any decent or good D&D YouTube channels, and I doubt their existence. But then, I don't use YouTube for that sort of thing.

[frogglesmash]

Quick question for the thread though... does anyone know of a youtube series like this that isn't terrible? I'd like to try some out that are fun to watch, and not so much like this one, or one I saw a bunch of years ago where some DM spent half an hour explaining that he likes to increase player interest by stealing their stuff.

There's The Gentlemen Gamer, I haven't watched much of his stuff. His content isn't exclusively about d&d, and most of his movies are about lore and fluff, and from what if seen it isn't half bad.

[Blackhawk748]

Whoa, it's like it's right out of Knights of the Dinner Table!

Quick question for the thread though... does anyone know of a youtube series like this that isn't terrible? I'd like to try some out that are fun to watch, and not so much like this one, or one I saw a bunch of years ago where some DM spent half an hour explaining that he likes to increase player interest by stealing their stuff.

Spoony is fun, but his is more of Gamer Tales than anything about DMing. Great fun though.

[Deophaun]

Whoa, it's like it's right out of Knights of the Dinner Table!

Quick question for the thread though... does anyone know of a youtube series like this that isn't terrible? I'd like to try some out that are fun to watch, and not so much like this one, or one I saw a bunch of years ago where some DM spent half an hour explaining that he likes to increase player interest by stealing their stuff.
Dungeon Bastard (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KB5Kg9qWHn0). I now incorporate sock puppets into all my campaigns.

[Bronk]

Dungeon Bastard (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KB5Kg9qWHn0). I now incorporate sock puppets into all my campaigns.

Whoa, that one was short and snappy! I'll have to look the other ones up later, but cool.

Any more?

[Âmesang]

Spoony is fun, but his is more of Gamer Tales than anything about DMing. Great fun though.
I'm especially a fan of the Counter Monkey episodes "Circle Strafe" and "Leaping Wizards" (about making dragons, 1st-level mages, and other enemies fight intelligently) as well as "The Bardic Knock Spell" (about properly using Bluff; think "what would Axel Foley do?").

Although regarding gamer tales, "Shadowrun: The Code" and "The Jedi Hunter" are fun. :smallbiggrin: I also have to mention "Thou Shall Not %&#$ With The Lady Of Pain."

[SwordChucks]

ProJared has some D&D videos. They're not the main focus of his channel but they're there.

[TheBrassDuke]

Please pm me who these people are/were.

Seconded, please.

[TheBrassDuke]

And it's obvious that he doesn't know how the game works (you can't get 20d6 on a normal Fireball, for one...), despite how he acts otherwise.

Tack on Energy Substitution + Energy Admixture and you can push 20d6 +...

[atemu1234]

Tack on Energy Substitution + Energy Admixture and you can push 20d6 +...

Which is really, really not-broken. Admixture is not that great.

[Strigon]

Which is really, really not-broken. Admixture is not that great.

What if you can cast it 64 times a day?

[atemu1234]

What if you can cast it 64 times a day?

I'd argue being able to cast it 64 times a day is the broken thing, not the feat.

[Arael666]

I'd argue being able to cast it 64 times a day is the broken thing, not the feat.

I didn't watch the video, but I'm pretty sure this ability is just some horribly wrong interpretation of rules, and I don't mean RAW silly, just outright inability to comprehend the actual text.

[Hamste]

I'd argue being able to cast it 64 times a day is the broken thing, not the feat.

Depends on the character level, you can use higher level slots to cast lower level spells so 64 isn't that bad if they were say 20th level characters particularly if they use any sort of meta magic reducer.

[RolkFlameraven]

Depends on the character level, you can use higher level slots to cast lower level spells so 64 isn't that bad if they were say 20th level characters particularly if they use any sort of meta magic reducer.

True, but he says something like '64 6D6' right after and then goes on to say they were level 7.

So either he is misremembering (quite possible) or he is just pulling crap out of his arse. He also says that the Sor did this with feats. Now baring this guy being a complete idiot and the Sor was using wands, I think this is more along the lines of 'The Sor had Fiery Burst that was powered by his fireball, and I've twisted everything up in my head over the years into it being 64 fireballs!!!!'

Or the player saw how this guy knew jack squat about the Warlock decided to see what he could get away with as his DM didn't seem to think that having passing knowledge of books he allowed in play was necessary and did, indeed, cheat.

[ATHATH]

Seconded, please.
I would like to receive this pm (stupid minimum character limit...).

[Segev]

Having finally clicked the OP's link last night, I think the biggest sin isn't the rules misconceptions, the failure of knowledge of what really is powerful in the game and what isn't, nor even the idiotic notion that using a fireball on a crowded room is selfishly denying the other PCs a chance to shine. It's that the guy is BORING to listen to, and doesn't do anything interesting to justify having a camera trained on him. He's just talking into it, and apparently reading some notes to himself to keep on topic. It'd be (slightly) better as a podcast, and even then...he's not a very entertaining speaker. He's just...ranting. And talking about how he's moderate and measured and how everybody else is a powergamer. Or something. It's not terribly coherent.

TL;DR: His greatest sin is that his video is dull.

[Strigon]

Having finally clicked the OP's link last night, I think the biggest sin isn't the rules misconceptions, the failure of knowledge of what really is powerful in the game and what isn't, nor even the idiotic notion that using a fireball on a crowded room is selfishly denying the other PCs a chance to shine. It's that the guy is BORING to listen to, and doesn't do anything interesting to justify having a camera trained on him. He's just talking into it, and apparently reading some notes to himself to keep on topic. It'd be (slightly) better as a podcast, and even then...he's not a very entertaining speaker. He's just...ranting. And talking about how he's moderate and measured and how everybody else is a powergamer. Or something. It's not terribly coherent.

TL;DR: His greatest sin is that his video is dull.

I'd argue that him being dull is the best thing about it.
Less people he's going to spread his nonsense to.

[kellbyb]

"All good saves, super-high Ac (including Touch), a pile of immunities, 7 attacks a round, 2d10 base damage weapon? Monks are so overpowered!"

Actually, he called out monks as one of the last things you would call OP in the video OP posted.

[Shnigda]

About to start watching this other video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkcW1b673Do&index=27&list=PL74gt5iL88iLAFFumwKg7cvifqOZjA0Bm&ab_channel=TtheWriter) by him. I reckon it's going to be fairly self-referential :P

EDIT: Doesn't seem to be about dealing with bad DMs, just problems you might come across as a DM... how disappointing

[Bronk]

Dungeon Bastard (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KB5Kg9qWHn0). I now incorporate sock puppets into all my campaigns.

Okay, finished all of those... Most of them were pretty good! On to the next set.

[Bayar]

Whoa, it's like it's right out of Knights of the Dinner Table!

Quick question for the thread though... does anyone know of a youtube series like this that isn't terrible? I'd like to try some out that are fun to watch, and not so much like this one, or one I saw a bunch of years ago where some DM spent half an hour explaining that he likes to increase player interest by stealing their stuff.

Go check out Demonac (https://www.youtube.com/user/demonac).

Edit: Please forgive my ignorance on not clicking the video from my phone, I usually try to avoid random idiocy from YouTube. I had originally recommended the same person the thread was discussing. And I still think he needs another chance. Found about him a couple of weeks ago when looking around for Worldbuilding advice, and I think his How to craft a D&D Campaign (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL74gt5iL88iIHv7Y_kfOa2XbaAmjTn3NW) series is pretty solid. Sure he might have some bias one way or another about what constitutes OP, but from the way he put "OP" in his title, he might just be referring on the average joe game that doesn't have Batman Wizards and CoDzillas stomping around.

@eggynack: Well it most likely not JP, seeing as this guy's opinion is "Once someone aquires a Handy Haversack I'll just assume he has an item ready to retrieve and don't bother with the busywork of what item is stored where on his person".

[eggynack]

I haven't watched this stuff yet (or at least not recently enough to remember it), but on the subject of him plausibly being ol' Jedi, it seems unlikely. Based on the description, no part of the video's rant was about the mighty cheating of bags of holding or other extra-dimensional spaces, and that's an essential component of Jedi's deal. It'd be like the first or second video he'd post, or maybe the first and second. I tend to find that it's easier to identify someone as not being an old banned user from differences in opinion rather than differences in writing style, though I did once make such an assessment based on the presence of multi-quoting (or lack thereof).

[Aquillion]

Regarding the 20d6 fireball thing: Remember that every table has different levels of optimization. Cindy is technically not optimal, but most DMs aren't going to be able to handle her. I could see an optimized blaster wizard causing problems if the rest of the party is, like, fighters with basically random feat selection, Rogues who don't bother to flank and think UMD is too complicated, etc.

That doesn't excuse his absolutely terrible advice for dealing with it, of course.

[Quertus]

He was convinced that higher mathematics as a whole was bunk, I think. Sometimes people do that with things they can't wrap their head around.


As in, nothing is truly random?
That's... quite a theory. Isn't the internet marvelous?

Just thought I should point out that Einstein (and I) seem to do the same thing, by rejecting modern quantum mechanics. "God does not roll dice", and all that.

Just because, from within the system, we lack the ability to properly measure and predict the system, does not in any way prove that the system is not 100% deterministic.

One man's crazy is another man's genius. Just look at Mendel's peas.

And, yes, you can cheat at dice. So it is entirely possible that the individual in question was subconsciously controlling his fate. Which (along with... observer bias?) could help explain some of my own experiences, like my otherwise mediocre character who always won init against, always crit, and always one-shotted any "boss" encounters; or my character who rolled straight 1's for HP (less than a 1-in-a-billion chance of that happening, btw - and that's not counting the odds of him surviving long enough to retire).

[Starbuck_II]

#49:

He sounds reasonable starting at 4.20. But couldn't you just give them fire resistance enemies, it is the most common resistance?
Shoudn't your allies be happy you are pulling your weight. "Bad reputation": murdering bandits... do bandits have a union?
I mean, sure, survivors are possible. So, Bandits are lying about him. Enough that they refuse him service... because they are scared of him. Why would you refuse him if you are scared... most people are nice to people they are scared of... it was like he isn't hearing himself.
Heck, Charm person would get around any diplomacy penalties...


Wanted Posters posted from bandits or orcs... what? How can these guys if they are actual bandits post this? Is this an evil town?! So contrived... His rationale is guards will believe bandits over you...

Funny thing: he assumes a Fighter who has class skills like Swim would naturally be bad at swim. I mean, check penalties exist but high strength counters this plus skill points.

Fire elementals don't heal from fireballs...

[Strigon]

Just thought I should point out that Einstein (and I) seem to do the same thing, by rejecting modern quantum mechanics. "God does not roll dice", and all that.

Just because, from within the system, we lack the ability to properly measure and predict the system, does not in any way prove that the system is not 100% deterministic.

One man's crazy is another man's genius. Just look at Mendel's peas.

And, yes, you can cheat at dice. So it is entirely possible that the individual in question was subconsciously controlling his fate. Which (along with... observer bias?) could help explain some of my own experiences, like my otherwise mediocre character who always won init against, always crit, and always one-shotted any "boss" encounters; or my character who rolled straight 1's for HP (less than a 1-in-a-billion chance of that happening, btw - and that's not counting the odds of him surviving long enough to retire).

When you can't measure or predict what an outcome will be, probability is indeed a real thing.
For example, from the moment you let go of a die, barring other people interfering, its final state can be determined. However, just because it can be determined with enough data, it is not incorrect to say that for any given side, the probability of it landing on that side is 1 in 6. Were I to pause time there and ask you what side would show, you wouldn't be able to know - any of your guesses have an equal chance of being right.
Likewise, if I ask you to guess whether I'm currently thinking of an even or odd number, for you, the odds of either being correct are equal - even though the answer is already determined.

While you can make the argument that nothing on our scale is truly random, and everything is deterministic, that doesn't stop it from being completely indistinguishable from randomness.
To say probability doesn't exist is to do away with an entire branch of mathematics and get rid of quantum mechanics as well. Which is not a good idea.

[ExLibrisMortis]

Just thought I should point out that Einstein (and I) seem to do the same thing, by rejecting modern quantum mechanics. "God does not roll dice", and all that.
While it is certainly not strange to defend the scientific opinion that the universe is ultimately entirely deterministic, it is unreasonable to claim that a) chance is a conspiracy (by 'the man' or otherwise) and b) that probability theory is not sound as a branch of mathematics. So I don't think you and Einstein are making anywhere near the same claims as the person being referred to in your quote.