Stupid shit your GM/players do

The lack of sound from the dice rolling, and possible the explanation.

I think 60ft here means move action for 30 and action for another 30, which is what most medium races standard movement rate is.
OP is complaining that, while they do technically supposed to move at the same speed, in the narrative it is stupid that they won't get a change (a check) to catch up with him.
Also, if it's 5e OP is talking about, you have to start making endurance check after 3 rounds of running.

Best roleplaying of a fighter who dumped wis ever.

Not gonna lie, that's pretty great.

>how does OP know whether the GM was making saves?

No dice being rolled, GM doesn't appear to be thinking about it, he isn't looking up those rules, he doesn't know the players' save bonuses, he's not mentioning fatigue at all.

>>I'm going to spend exactly 5 seconds thinking up a plan that could not possibly work, then treat this plan like god's gift to gaming

Pic more related than you'd think.

In 3.5 you can Run, which gives you four times your move speed in a straight line.

>Also, if it's 5e OP is talking about, you have to start making endurance check after 3 rounds of running.
>have to start making endurance checks after less than a minute of running
I'd blame this on fatbeards, but even at my fattest and beardest I could run for a fucking minute.

Me
>Me - The crevasse is wide, you must cross it
>Player - How risky is it? Can I get across it?
>Me - its too far for you to jump, but the rogue could.
>Player - How risky is it? can I get across it?
>Me - you couldn't, but if someone else rigged up ropes
>Player - How risky is it? can I get across it?
>Me - what is your plan?
>Player - How risky is it? can I get across it?
>Me - that would depend on your plan and method.
>Player - How risky is it?
>Me - what is your plan?
>Player - can I get across it?
>WHAT IS YOUR PLAN TO ACCOMPLISH THIS BASIC TASK?
Fuckers didn't even try to come up with anything resembling a plan and we went back and forth like this until we ran out of time for the session.

>build character around something because he days I needed to for this game
>never comes up or does for 1/2 of 1 session for a 50 session campaign

You could take a run feat and get x5 and bonuses on run checks

Except he was being sincere. He also yelled out "what? no I stop him" whenever the rogue picked an NPC's pocket. It was one of those games.

I think he genuinely believed ghosts are always described with lower halves that just kinda trail off line in cartoons.

He still gets shit for it.

One the things I hate the most is when a player immediately goes "I TRY TO STOP HIM!" every time someone else does something they don't like.

OP here
the GM just straight up said right when the player went to go chase the NPC that there was no way to catch the NPC because they both have the same move speed. No rolls or anything.

Same. Which is why every time he did that, I said "you don't actually see him do that".

Though if you really want to trigger these guys:

>Rogue: "I pickpocket the mayor"
>Busybody: "I try to stop him!"
>GM: "You don't notice it."
>Busybody: "I roll notice!"
>GM: "Why are you rolling Notice?"

>Also, if it's 5e OP is talking about, you have to start making endurance check after 3 rounds of running.

3 plus constitution modifier, the DC for the checks is 10, and failure means you can keep running but get an exhaustion level. It takes five exhaustion levels to stop you from running. These exhaustion levels are special and go away if you sit down for an hour.

If you are have constitution modifier of +0, which is the human average...
>run 3 rounds before having to make checks starting round 4
>45% chance each round (4 and after) to gain an exhaustion level
>Average 16.11 rounds after you start running before you have to stop, minimum time is 8 rounds

So yeah, a person who is of average fitness, having the worst run of his life (1.8% chance) would be fucked after less than a minute, but most of the time he could get in roughly a minute and a half before having to stop.

>Ok, what's the problem?
Everyone moves the exact same speed unless they have special feats. As long as you keep sprinting nobody without feats will ever catch you. GM should have used some GM fiat to come up with a solution eg. roll and add your agility, he does the same for the target, whoever gets the higher number wins the chase. That or said "X has higher constitution so you will get tired before him and he will escape unless you shoot him or something" or "you have a higher constitution so you will eventually catch him."

This, really. A good GM should present several opportunities for a chase like that to end. Or at the very least not sandbag every attempt to end it by citing movement rules. Simply saying "oh you'll never catch him because of this 60 foot per round rule" is pretty damn lazy.

Players repeatedly insist that high rolls equals automatic success.
>"the crowd does not attack the priest"
>"but I rolled a 20!"
>"let me put it simply - you are a stranger who turned up in town and immediately started insulting people and pissing off the local leaders. The priest is a beloved local figure. Nothing you roll will convince the populace to abandon their deeply held religious convictions and friendly relations with this man and attck him."
>"but I rolled a 20!"
>"you failed, move on"
>"stop fucking railroading us"

From DM's perspective, regarding the players:

"What would [NPC] say if I said xxx?"
"I know how to make xxx in real life though, why doesn't my character?"
"Why should I have to buy a player's handbook? Can't you just print off all 200 relevant pages of it for me?"
"But I rolled a 20! Let me [ridiculous action]!"
"D&D 2nd edition is too complicated, isn't there a simpler version?"
"D&D 3rd edition is too complicated, isn't there a simpler version?"
"D&D 5th edition is too complicated, isn't there a simpler version?"

Fuck my life, I need a new group.

>Trying to run a somewhat-dramatic scene where an NPC tells the players they have a macguffin that a dragon is hunting for, and they need to flee so he doesn't destroy their home.
>Player: "Lol fuck u haha i grab her tittys ha check this porn I found. I mean, no that's now what I say."

Fuck all of you.

>wasting your effort and creativity on shitty players

You have no idea how desperately I want a better group.

I'd drop these assholes in a second at the opportunity to play with people who actually want to be there and put some effort in.

You can't understand my frustration at having wasted a campaign I really enjoy on these people and having it recorded.

>things that totally happened.

On one hand, it definitely is frustrating when players don't seem to actually care about playing the game.

On the other hand, don't feel hurt when not everyone is excited to see you act out your novel.

>Fighter: "I look under the tables. Do these people have feet?"
>Me: "...Yes, they have feet."
>Fighter: *turns to rest of the group* "Okay guys we're good, they aren't ghosts."

This player is a treasure.

Threadly reminder that not having a group is better than having a shitty group.

are you on roll20?

Yes, but that's not really why it's hard to replace the group. It's about the livestream channel that I put a ton of work creating and promoting and have become kind of attached to.

This is a great time for "no, but" GMing. You rolled super high? Cool! Instead of them turning on you or telling you to fuck off, you cast a shadow of doubt in a few people's minds.

There, now the player accomplished something and it's a thing that could lead to further plot development. Everyone is happy.

Had a DM have a cutpurse steal 1mil each off 5 players then immediately disappears down an alley and when the rogue with bullshit Run speed of around 760ft thanks to magic bullshit he bought chases after immediately the fucking pickpocket is gone. In an empty straight shot alley way that was maybe 5 squares long and 1 square away from the group.

He just wanted to unfuck himself after he threw crazy money at us he thought we'd never get cause his form of difficulty adjustment is just add more goblins to the goblin cave.
We just wanted to buy a nation and turn that shit into army simulator to end that boring and monotonous campaign of "impossible" fetch quests. This would have meant he would have had to step down and let foreverDM take the helm again cause he could barely keep a story for 5 people straight let alone armies and nations.
He even threw a damn hissy fit and left before foreverDM fiated that cutpurse bullshit and we started having fun again.

Other than that our DM before ForeverDM was trap happy and had to implement harsh punishment through unfortunate events whenever we used a safety stick to test for traps.
>test a room by shoving a 50 foot 10 segmented pole through the door
>proceed to jingle keys on end of stick
>pull pole back and attach bag of marbles with really a long string
>shove stick back in and drop the marbles
>still nothing
>wizard pulls out his bag'o'cats(a 60lb bag of holding with a breathing tube shoved through the opening full of cats)
>tie Cat #2418 with highwaymans hitch knot to pole
>put pole back into room
>swing pole around and gently bash it against walls
>nope. Nothing. Release the cat
>room is engulfed in flames
"Okay guys. You got me! You figured it out! Clapclap. Lets move on."
>undo pole just in time for all of us to be insta killed from behind by an indiana jones style boulder we neither heard or had a way of reaching us

>having a dramatic scene = DM is railroading the players into his pet novel

You're the fag who always wants to play a kender, aren't you.

Why not run a Veeky Forums group? If you run 5e, I'd love to join (if you're a decent game master).

To be fair, I usually let my players notice when a player is about to do something stupid or dangerous, like piss of the mayor of a town and maybe get punished/jailed.

Besides, if I couldn't stop fellow players from getting themselves killed in the first session when I'm playing, I would be pretty frustrated with the GM.

>Why not run a Veeky Forums group?
Because the idea makes me want to vomit. Also, because of the fact that you just made a post saying "Oh your group is bad? Just recruit a group so I can play!", which even if I had an opening in a game, is not how I would go about recruiting someone.

Because you'll have a bunch of people doing Veeky Forums memes or all making variants on some of the characters made here such as cultist-chan or faptau

Well also because Veeky Forums as a community is kind of ass. Player-supremacy, neckbeardism, as well as the fact that 90% of them would demand it be a PbP text game and that they be allowed to play their hombrew content that they learned about here on Veeky Forums as well as trying to make characters to re-create greentext stories they've read here while trying to create their own epic greentext pasta.

You'd be better off bathing in sewage.

>anyone who doesn't want to sit through my monologues is a lolrandum faggot

I'm just saying know your players, and know your game. If a consistent problem is your players telling you to stop talking them to death, then maybe it's not all on them. Players want NPCs to talk to them, not at them.

It's 99% more likely that the players are just shit.

I think that movement in 5e is supposed to be basically a dead sprint. You try sprinting for 18 seconds. Sure anyone can jog for a minute, but if you're going balls to the wall and also probably wearing armor and toting all sorts of other stuff, you're not gonna last very long

>"Oh your group is bad? Just recruit a group so I can play!"

>"omg tg my group is so bad. id do anything to get a better group"
>"NO I WILL NOT RUN A Veeky Forums GROUP, I HATE Veeky Forums"
Yikes.

I have no doubt the players are shit. But the guy's attitude and the hyperbolic way he describes it makes me feel like he's probably not much better.

Yes, I'd love a better group.

That does not mean I want to waste my time trying to build a group from Veeky Forums in hopes that it's good. Just because I want a better group doesn't mean any group of randoms I assemble will somehow be better.

I have no reason to think good players can be recruited from Veeky Forums, and finding out whether that is true or not would require investing time and energy to recruit and playtest randoms.

You've obviously never met my group. As far as they are concerned, a high roll equals automatic success at whatever they are trying to do, exactly as they want you t to happen, when they want it to happen. In their mind, Nat 20 means they can accomplish anything from building a cannon out of scrap to convincing the King to hand over the entire treasury along with his daughter and crown.
Plus they're an impatient bunch of fucks who lack any sense of subtlety. When they say "attack the priest" they don't mean ""erode his support" they mean "instant pitchforks and torches to burn him alive", and anything less than that is "railroading".
Would drop the group if they're was anyone else I knew wiling to play.

I agree with this sentiment. A lot of the people on Veeky Forums are just as bad as the horror stories that get posted.

Sounds like the perfect group for a military sci-fi game, Vietnam style.

Fuck, yeah I forgot about the people trying to recreate that luchador or that necromancer who wanted to make the world a better place. Shit I used to play dark heresy with a guy who made a tech priest who had Veeky Forums in her brain and that made my head hurt.

Something that always bothers me is when players use out of game knowledge about real life stuff in game.

In one campaign we had a girl playing a kind of airheaded but socially skilled character. In real life this girl knows a shit ton of stuff about diving, sailing, etc.
Every time there was a boat or an underwater situation of any kind she would apply her real life knowledge as if her character was an expert on those things. I was making sure to keep my mouth shut (I'm a scuba diver as well) since my character wouldn't know anything about this stuff, and it just took me out of the immersion every time to have this girl who had no applicable skills in game suddenly pull out advanced facts and tactics for maintaining control of a sailing boat in a storm or how to safely dive into a wreck/cave. I had to bite my tongue not to call her out on it, but perhaps I should have. It's not like we couldn't have just asked some npc for advice and gotten the same information with some further roleplay anyway I suppose so maybe it just sped things up but still irks me...

I kinda get what you're talking about. My old group had a bunch of wikipedia scholars who knew a bunch of shit about pre-gunpowder military tactics. So they applied it to every situation they could, regardless of whether it made sense for their characters to know.

As a rule I generally prefer it when people don't sperg out about their IRL knowledge of stuff. There are a few exceptions. If someone knows a lot about police procedure, I won't begrudge them for applying that to their police officer character.

I think that's actually a thing in like, Asian mythologies, that ghosts don't have feet.

Exactly! Had she played a character that had at some point done sailing or scuba diving before that point it would have been fine, or if she came from a family of sailors etc.
Unfortunately neither of her two characters in the games I've played with her has had any sailor or scuba diving history and they still dump facts and statistics that change the games direction significantly.

It's great that you're knowledgeable about stuff in real life, but if it doesn't make sense for your character to know those things keep it to yourself, or perhaps discreetly ask the gm if it's OK for you to somehow pass the information to a character who logically would possess that information (after a potential roll if deemed necessary).

In fairness though when you're really knowledgeable about something it's really hard to voluntarily ignore what you know. Especially if you're some kind of professional, because then you're conditioned to feel your knowledge is common sense.

Jesus, tell me about it. I have a player that regardless of what character he plays, they all have in depth knowledge of how to make cheap explosives from everyday objects.

Welcome to Corneria. I like swords.

Is the answer "crashing this game"?

Notice is a passive thing, you shitbag. It's to, wait for it...NOTICE THINGS AROUND YOU.

For the most part, my group is pretty okay. I've got a guy who's very randumb and tries to hard to be funny, but he actually cracks out at least two really good jokes every week, a couple times to the degree that we had to stop the game for a couple minutes so everybody could catch their breath, so that offsets his annoying factor a bit.
I've also got a guy who's way too insistent. Like, I'm running a rules light homebrew from Veeky Forums and I have to BS stuff whenever situations or questions come up that the rules don't cover. I tend to rule towards whatever benefits my players at that given moment, but this guy is always trying to squeeze more. On top of that, he's one of those guys who has to always be right no matter what he's arguing about. The best example of this is roughly summed up as follows:
>group is raiding a Russian outpost while the main force is being drawn away
>only one member of the guard forces left
>they're trying to work it down but the dice are not agreeing with them
>suddenly something new airdrops in, lands on the guard, and wastes it like it's nothing
>from the smoking remains it looks at the party
>this thing is made from tech that nobody recognizes
>a couple of them are all ready to open fire
>the shyest guy in the group is hesitant
>all attempts at communication are met with no response, but it doesn't seem to be doing much except looking at them
>shy dude is wondering about the newcomer's intentions and whether it's actually hostile to them
>Mr. Insistent immediately goes on a tirade about how this is a combat zone in which some hunk of unknown tech dropped from the sky and it's automatically hostile and he knows because his parents are military
For the record, this guy is maybe 21 and has done zero time in any sort of armed force.
>shy dude fires back that both his parents also served and how that doesn't mean anything on its own
>shy dude eventually backs down because that's what he does and Mr. Insistent is louder than him

>Players repeatedly insist that high rolls equals automatic success.

You need to communicate that dice rolls are only needed when the outcome is in question, as the dice generate random variables representing chaos and uncertainty. And you as the DM are supposed to call for rolls when appropriate, and ask the players not to roll unless that's the case.

Most of the time the outcome is quite certain, however. This is why they don't roll for things like putting on their pants or mounting a horse. There is no question as to what will happen when they do those things. If a player wants to shoot an arrow at the moon, this is why you don't roll for it - there is only one possible outcome (it does not hit the moon, and eventually returns to the ground), so a random element to decide the outcome is not necessary

That's not how shit works in real life. "Hey! I'm an unencumbered adult human and so are you, so we'll move at precisely the same rate and I'll never gain on you are fall behind by even a foot! We can run for hours and I'll still be exactly the same distance behind you." That's just silly.

>real life
user...

The 5th edition DMG has fairly in-depth rules for chases, chase-complications, and endurance.

Not sure what your point is, but the point is that having everybody move at exactly the same rate breaks verisimilitude in such a strong way that it should be improvised away. It's akin to the peasant railgun like that, where the GM should be like "that doesn't make any sense, so it doesn't work like that."

It can also become hard to draw the line, some aspects of any players personality are going to shine through into a character, choosing what to intentionally stop from happening can be tricky, although that specific example probably should've been clear.

I am totally down for that if you're doing it online.

Shoot me some contact info so I can ask more on it, user friend.

Rolled 1, 4, 2, 5, 5, 3, 5, 4, 1, 2, 1, 2, 1, 3, 5, 1, 2, 5, 1, 5 = 58 (20d6)

See

Oh, you're the nigger shitting up the 5e general. YOU DON'T GET TO TALK ABOUT PEOPLE BEING SHIT, FUCKER.

Not sure if same user, but asking for contact info to discern

>time
>day
>language preference
>system
>player expectations
>availability
>game policies

It's important to see if players and GM gel before considering a new player.

Just as well, compiling candidates to form an ideal player pool from which you'll form a new group (from multiple sources, I should hope) seems like a pretty sharp idea, but I'm just making a case because I'm looking for an extra game day in my week and enjoy spirited GMs.

>thebrownnosing.gif

I believe it was Yes who said it best:
>Owner of a lonely heart, much better than an owner of a broken heart.

Though it's possible I'm entirely missing the point of the song.

You. You are the problem.

>Better to have loved and lost, than never to have loved at all.

Quotes are stupid and you're stupid for buying into the stupid gimmick.

>Watch it now: The eagle in the sky. How he dancin' one and only
So there.

youtu.be/9O6e7cgkeqw

>Baby are you down, down, down, down, down

Good job.

Rolled 3, 6, 4, 1, 3, 3, 6, 4, 4, 3, 5, 2, 5, 5, 6, 6, 3, 2, 1, 6 = 78 (20d6)

Not my fault /5eg/ is full of butthurt nofunners who hate fun builds that are RAW permissible.

Sorry to go off on a tangent here, but I think I found a music video that embodies the very essence of this picture: youtu.be/vpIduDaggVA

>I'm blue da ba de da ba di da ba de da ba di da ba de da ba di da ba de da ba di da ba de da ba di da ba de da ba di da ba de da ba di

Yes, because I clearly intended "The eagle in the sky, how he dancin' one and only" as an actual retort.

oh THATS the lyric. I thought it was

Watch it now, evil in disguise.

I'm sometimes the randumb player, though a lot of times I'm more, "it would be funny if we did x"
>Keep suggesting throughout session we should do outlandish things
>"Hey a bank, we should totally rob them!"
>GM says there are too many guards
>Keep joking about how I "roll" to shoot guards
>GM had enough, actually has me roll to shoot a guard
>Absolutely shit my pants
Thankfully I missed and after much begging he says it was a weapon malfunction and the guards let me off with a warning

GM
>Its the second session for this campaign? guess its time to hint at/ introduce the questline to eventual meet/ begin to railroad you towards a dragon
>oh you're ignoring those and interested in another quest or just exploring?
>Well here's a dragon and he's making you do shit
>But the reward for his task is a pull off of the Deck of many things!
Fucking kill me, also
>Party is helping out local Guards dealing with a massive enemy attack
>Suggest to the Captain of the guard a mutually beneficial plan that will save time and lives
>Captain tells me to fuck off and if he sees me again he'll have me imprisoned
>complete 180 from his usual attitude for no reason
>DM:"lol what did you expect running a thri-kreen with 4 Charisma"

Players
>I want to play as the Face of the party but have no ability to smooth talk or BS In or out of character to the point the DM gives up on RPing coversations and just has me roll to see if I convince someone of something

>Just as well, compiling candidates to form an ideal player pool from which you'll form a new group (from multiple sources, I should hope) seems like a pretty sharp idea

Yeah, maybe if it actually worked. But the problem is, every player thinks they're amazing and somehow totally different from "every other player". And the problem is, while DMs have to sift through applicants and put together the best group of people they can so they can actually run their campaign without having it fail miserably, players invest nothing. They're not looking for the "perfect" game, they're just looking for any game. So if they send you an email saying "lol i wanan play", they expect a response back, and they expect a campaign starting right away, or they'll just go find someone else to apply with.

Most players have applied to a dozen games simultaneously, they just shotgun that shit, because it doesn't matter.

So the idea of being able to "pool" players to select from is a flawed concept, because by the time you start going through the list, the only ones who will even be left to interview are the ones who got rejected from other games.

>I'm sometimes the randumb player, though a lot of times I'm more, "it would be funny if we did x"

I literally wish cancer and violent death upon you and everyone related to you.

Yours is actually kind of cool. Mine was more just confusing...
>In and around the lake,
>Marlins come out of the sky,
>And they stand there.

I see your point, but I'm in the same smooth sailing group of mooks I started with 2 years ago. We're all total strangers, and the DM had an incredibly stringent process for picking out players, and has four players that join us to quietly observe our sessions from time to time to keep current with the story and recent events while they wait for an opening to be allowed. However, I do suppose the exception is not the rule.

The effort put into their application should ideally send a message to the GM that they're interested in THEIR game for X, Y, and Z. To be honest, I never found it tough to discern players with genuine interest in a game versus players with an interest in ANY game apart.

Forgot to mention we started applying in the Summer while the game started in the Fall.

>1 of 94 applicants.
>mfw make the cut

whew lad

D&DINRL
IS
NOT
REAL
LIFE

It has different rules and mechanics that are under absolutely no requirement to be consistent with IRL.

>rules
>not guidelines

To be fair, hit points don't necessarily measure damage, they might also measure luck or plot armor or the will to keep fighting.
If it measures luck, then there's no (obvious) way to a spectator to know that you're depleting it.
The only hits that are required to physically damage the creature are the one that bloodies it, the one that KOs it and the one that kills it.

So, from a spectator's perspective, you don't have a way of telling whether you're chewing through a boss with a crapton of HP, or if the boss is NOPEing your attacks.

>DM tells player to roll for an action
>player describes some asisine way to do it
>argues that it's possible in the real world

Like, "oh, monks have been skilled enough to skip on wooden planks floating on water to reach the other side, why can't I?"

Cause you're a fucking cleric with 10 Dex in heavy armor you fucking jabroni.

You should probably qualify this by mentioning that you're playing a chatroom text-based Ponyfinder game.

one of my favoirte stories is we had a dm who did everything was traviling at MPH, and this was like 30-40 mph. this gave the Lich-friend the idea to use ray of effeblement on said fast runners.
Paint the pavement red, boys!

>>I'm going to spend exactly 5 seconds thinking up a plan that could not possibly work, then treat this plan like god's gift to gaming
Jesus christ, this.
I understand that the rules are, in many places, open to interpretation - and that you should defer to your players' interpretation of the rules, when it's something that involves their character.
But the rules don't bend THAT fucking much. Christ.
"Hey DM ignore the Run / Move rules so I can-"
>No
"Hey DM can you make it so the Lightning spell can-"
>No
"But lightning IRL wouldn't-"
>It's a magic spell. Do you have those IRL?

The amount of times players have tried to set something wooden on fire, when the weather was cold, or humid, or the air was still, or the thing in question was storing a lot of water (e.g. a healthy tree), is astounding.

His plan is to roll a dice and hope to get above a target number.

What is the target number?

>that depends on your

You're the DM, that's at your discretion. Now what is the target number?

>fuck you it's 30

Oh cool, too risky to cross. Could'jve just said that the first time I asked