ITT: Things your players say that destroy immersion

It's a question that should probably be asked before you fight golems, immediately after you discover it is defended by golmes really.

The answer to all of those is
>your character doesn't know
Say that and nothing more, every time. It works

>I think we should end the session now
>I think the session is now ending
>What's my initiative/to hit/AC/HP/damage
>What does my spell do
>My character is to bad
>Does it look like he has a high Wis
>I know how this works, I die (after one weakhit and we're level 17)
>We could end this campaign and do a different one
>How does he have that spell? That's of the wrong class
>His will is higher than mine and I have okay will, wtf
>What is this monster's regeneration
>Huh I forgot what was happening
>Your character is overpowered
>Nothing matters because X's character is overpowered
>Wah Y gets along better with NPCs than I do
>I hate all of your NPCs
>You're a bad DM
>You're getting all the main character stuff so stop wasting time
This is about 3 years worth of shitty quotes from my friends and they only become worse

>>Nothing matters because X's character is overpowered

What were the specifics of this? Because it's a legit criticism when it's about DnD and a min-maxed high level wizard in a party of unoptimized funPCs.

>But but rape is immoral!

Mildly related. Had a player say this when I ran a game where I had nameless NPC's get raped, pillaged, and murdered (not necessarily in that order) in order to drive home that "the BBEG is REALLY fucking evil".

The frustrating bit wasn't the acknowledgement that it was immoral and terrible, it was that in the game he GM'ed, he had my male elf character get consistently attacked by tentacled monsters that were very interested in my pants. Which he thought was quite hilarious. Admittedly I agreed the first time, then it quickly became stupid.

No, the annoyance was that his objection was made OOC because he didn't really like the idea of fighting evil minions who raped things. Despite something consistently trying to rape my character at least once every time he was GM.

"How much do the potatoes cost?"

DELET THIS

>yes, I heard you say he looks pretty rough, but EXACTLY how much HP does the ogre have left?
To be fair this is a partially legitimate question. While the exact HP is metagaming if I have been hacking at a dragon or ogre or whatever for ten minutes I kind of want to know if I am actually doing anything. Saying "he's looking a little rough" is useless. What does he have a bruise on his face or is he missing an arm, limping, and wheezing like he is about to collapse? You don't need to give the exact HP, nor do you need to be highly detailed but at least give a good idea of what condition he is in. Just have generic levels of nearly dead
>Minor injuries
>A little rough
>Fucked up
>Nearly dead
>Ded
At least then I know "hey I might be able to finish him off soon" or "fuck it we need to retreat or change our strategy."

>this plot hook is stupid, why does he want us to bring him the golden idol for safe keeping if there's already golems and shit protecting it?
This is a legitimate question.
>wait, those two spells aren't on the sorcerer list, what class is this guy again?
This is a legitimate question. You should be expected to be consistent, if you say someone is a sorcerer but give them druid spells it eliminates my ability to take your word at face value. If I know that you just give enemies random abilities because why not, telling me that someone is a renowned swordsman is useless to me because for all I know he could have random traits or spells from unrelated classes.
>If we decide to fight these guys, how much experience do we get?
Don't give xp for killing shit, you just incentivize murder hoboing. Either have them level up when they accomplish something major (eg. a major arc) or give them xp for the accomplishment of overarching goals regardless of the means.

Fuck-asses in my group who get pissy when the creature has some shit they don't know. This is in Pathfinder, by the way.

> you take 4 damage
> but you rolled a 2
> yeah they have a bonus to damage
> how?? they are using longbows
> they just do

They had weapon specialization.....

Also when the characters ask exactly what the hp, AC, etc of the monster is. One of the guys in my gorup literally stands behind me while I am DMing. This was important for our other DM because he didn't know the rules that well so we would help him with the combat and just pretend we didn't know the monster's stats at all. But for fucks sake I know how to DM, quit fucking cheating. I've been playing 3.5 twice as long as any of them. It's not the only system we play thank god.

>One of the guys in my gorup literally stands behind me while I am DMing.

This is where you use the advanced strategy known as 'talk to them like an adult'.

Take the problem player aside and tell him that you're not other DM, you know what you're doing, and him hovering over your shoulder is kind of rude and you'd appreciate it if he sat down like the rest of the group. If he refuses, then feel free to tell him to fuck off.

>metagaming
>metagaming
>metagaming
>legitimate questions
1. Ask if it's wounded, not hp
2. Ask NPCs not GM
3. Do your character know all spells wizard can use?

>verily and for sooth. The events we find ourselves in are like a terribly written story and the gods seem like morons.
>Strewth, Jethro. Perhaps we should replace the gods with ones that aren't like bundles of sticks.

>You're a bad DM

Just going off your post, this is accurate.

You must've got shitty luck with players. The only time we reference that shit is when we're making jokes.

This is actually how I handle requests not to make OOC comments.

To be fair there's a difference between a dog humping your leg and a child-molesting priest. I can understand why he doesn't view tentacle beasts and human soldiers in the same light.

He's still a moron, granted.

>wait, those two spells aren't on the sorcerer list, what class is this guy again?
>This is a legitimate question. You should be expected to be consistent, if you say someone is a sorcerer but give them druid spells it eliminates my ability to take your word at face value. If I know that you just give enemies random abilities because why not, telling me that someone is a renowned swordsman is useless to me because for all I know he could have random traits or spells from unrelated classes.

You sound autistic and if someone bitched at me for having creatures that aren't player characters not act entirely like player characters I'd tell them to fuck off from my table.

Play Paranoia.

Claiming any knowledge of the rules is treason and grounds for immediate in-game termination.

But honestly, this >HP
Just fucking ask "did my attack wound him". It's not fucking hard.

>Sorcerer spells
If it's about a PC, sure. Otherwise who fucking cares? The evil forest necromancer will have Druid spells because it's cool and/or interesting from a story or mechanical standpoint. Antagonists are not PCs, they get to ignore some of the rules.

>No XP for killing shit
That I agree with.

>grew up with dog from the time I was 1
>she was a golden retriever
>got arthritis so bad she couldn't walk
>had to be put down when I was 15
>that pic reminds me of her

Feels bad man.

I'm sorry user. What matters is that she had a good long life, though.

She did, and since she my mother breeds dogs, her legacy is still around, 12 years later.

A fellow players was giving the barbarian shit for being able to crit and do massive damage, while he the cleric could only do massive damage with expenditure of a spell slot. Later the caster "btfo" him by being able to wipe a room of people while barbarian can only kill 1-2 targets a turn maybe

Those quotes are over the course of multiple campaigns and have a wide range of recipients, the only one directed at me while I DM'd was "this guy has higher will than I do"

>No, don't stop. Just going to rub one out real fast.

How would you convey the typical "How many spell slots do you have left?" question in-universe?

"Spell slots" are an in-universe thing to begin with.

Where does a gnoll cleric fall on this spectrum?

gnolls don't rape
they're pure "I want to eat you to death" without sexual tension

>gnolls don't rape
Now this is a curious subject.
Why don't they? There are all manner of halfbreeds but not half-gnolls?..

Because you're food.

Depends on the game and setting. But assuming standard DnD:
"how many spells do you still remember? "

In my game, we called em 'valences' after a greentext story I read ages ago. "How many valences do you have left?"

Orcs and ogres eat other humanoids too.

I figure "how many spells do you have left/can you still cast" is something you could ask a wizard IC.

>Antagonists are not PCs, they get to ignore some of the rules.
Not in my book.

>Antagonists are not PCs, they get to ignore some of the rules.
I can kind of see where both saids are coming from.
On one hand if NPCs can only go by the book and stat blocks, it makes NPCs predictable and the players can plan around it. The con is the NPCs are predictable.

On the other hand it can make NPCs unpredictable and exciting but the con is that since there is no concrete rules for what an NPC can do it lends to railroad situations like "The BBEG warrior teleports right before he is killed. O-oh yeah he could do that all along!"

I GM a fair bit, and all of those questions are fine. I might request some rephrasing or saying it IC, but otherwise they're pertectly fine.

I play with one guy all the time who does not comprehend immersion. He can't go for five minutes without making a pop culture reference.

I don't think NPCs not playing by the book and NPCs being predicrable is irreconcilable.
Ideally they should do both: a barbarian bad guy who's been shown or rumored to use teleportation before the actual confrontation is an exciting new challenge without any asspulls.

You could have had them research the spell and learn it on their own independent invention style, that's the whole point of being a wizard! Maybe it's a level higher than normal for the flexibility or something but it could turn into interesting loot if the party gets his book and or drinks his milkshake to learn it themselves (allows carry over of some of his story, like a patron who taught it to him now calling party caster, etc, which could give more plot insight)

Oddities are opportunities to make things interesting!

>"I roll Diplomacy"
>"..."
>"..."
>"What do you say?"
>"I try to get him to lower the price"
>"What do you say, to him, in character, in order to get him to lower the price?"
>"lol dunno"

Get more pizza, clean up the basement, your mom is calling.

>"This parrot is obviously a demonstration model"

Shamelessly stolen from:
hellmoo.org/wiki/index.php/Persuade

user, lets not get into that stupid argument of trying to have a player do something that is supposed to be represented with a die roll.
Despite it all, a player really only needs to state their intent behind the roll, with the roll representing the character's attempt and skill.
Forcing the player to do it is one of the well meaning, ultimately misguided things mediocre and worse gms do.
Just like a player need not do the somatic components of a spell or describe the manner of a grappling joint lock, a player should not be forced to rp out skill use to use a skill.
Prompt roleplay in a better fashion, scrub.

>"Stay at least thirty feet away, that's the fear AoE passive"

I'm not a telepath. I can't discern what the players wants to do if they just say "I roll diplomacy". At the very least I need to know what they are doing, and in-character action is always better than out of character descriptions. I'm not saying a guy playing a diplomat should have equal oratory skills himself, I'm saying that if you want to haggle with the blacksmith, you should actually fucking haggle with the blacksmith.

As such, I kindly invite you to kiss my ass with your useless, presumptive, derogatory "advice".

I have a houserule that I don't let players just say "I want to roll X"
They have to first describe their action and I may or may not tell them to make a roll. Fair enough there are a few phrases that pretty much result in a roll every time like "I want to take a closer look/I want to try and and get over there stealthily/I think they might be lying"
These things are fine, a player outright saying "I want to roll, perception,stealth, insight just ruins the immersion and lets them always try and influence you to pick their best skills.

Some people fuck pies too.

the answer to your worries is to not play with cunts.

Sometimes, when combat is more OOC talk than IC talk, I tend to reveal what I've discovered to my teammates OOCly

Something like
>I think this monster has 18 AC. I couldn't hit it with 17 but I hit it with 18 the last time
>Careful not to stand behind me, it can shoot lightning in a line

I justify it by thinking that, the longer combat goes on, the more the characters actually find out about the monster that they are fighting.

Ask for intention not words funkle bucket.

>"I persuade him to lower the price"
Please, no. I don't want to have every fucking transaction accompanied by a Diplomacy challenge. It'll take three weeks just to get through town.

WFRPG is the worst offender on this list. If you roll good enough and the shopkeep rolls bad enough, he'll give you money to take the thing off your hand. Just try to buy a castle enough times, and you're golden.

>You slash him viciously across the chest and he staggers back clutching his wound. Who's next?
>"How much health does he have now?"
>He's holding his wound and looking very bloody: his breath is heavy and his sword hand is shaking. He doesn't look like he will fight for much longer: who is next?
>"GM, how much health does he have left?"
>He's almost dead, okay?
>"How much HP, GM?"
>Your character takes two psychic damage and can't use his movement for his next round. Next?
>"Whoa, wtf? I was just asking"

Seriously, if somebody is being a prick, sometimes I feel like acting as I just wrote is justified.

>t. triggered rollplayer

This problem is easily houseruled away though...

>"The shopkeeper agrees to your terms and lowers the price in exchange for you to blow him."
>"What? No! I wouldn't say that!"
>"Then what would you say?"

Works every time.

You're not the DM people want.

You're the DM they need.

I always do, but the rule is no less shit for that.

I agree with this user.

Deus Vult you as a GM.

>"The shopkeeper agrees to your terms and lowers the price in exchange for you to blow him."
>"LOL ur character is gay"
>"XD"
Honestly I could see that derailing the game into lolrandum territory as much as it resolves the problem.

then you play with cunts

I'm currently a level 13 Rock Gnome Abjurationist in a 5E game. Me and another player were recently in another game about super heroes where we each piloted a part of what was essentially a megazord. I spend the first few minutes of the session openly speculating with other players about what we would do with a solar-powered megazord. "Me at the head with my knowledge. Barbarian at the arms with his strength. Monk at the legs with his speed. Druid at the body with his solar-power. Paladin at the heart with his courage." I then ask the DM if I could build a giant robot using tinker's tools, similar to the tiny clockwork robots afforded by my racial trait. She has me roll Intelligence (Arcana) and I get a natural 20, 30 with modifiers. She then tells me I don't know what a robot is, has me knocked unconscious during a crucial conversation with the king, and has me frightened for the rest of the session despite being in the paladin's Aura of Courage. Tell me Veeky Forums, did I break immersion enough to warrant this? If not, how should I talk to my DM about this?

That goes without saying

That's not lowering the price, that's exploring alternate payment methods.

well i just fucking said it.

Yeah but it went without saying before that

It's a thread about That Guy/GM. It's safe to assume that everyone in here has played with cunts.

If the GM is encouraging that kind of behavior with acts like that, he deserves them.
>I can't discern what the players wants to do if they just say "I roll diplomacy"
>What do you say
>I say what I need to in order to get a better price
>HURR WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO SAY?!!!
Naw, mate, you are just stupid, enforcing a needless "standard" on others that sates your personal autism, but doesn't work for all players.

Intent alone is never enough. To resolve a player action, you need intent AND method. This is basic GMing and people need to remember this, for God's sake.

Imagine the PCs are fighting a tough orc war chief. He set camp early in the morning and the party knows the chief will leave the camp at twilight to meet with an allied ogre shaman. Then this conversation occurs:

>Player 1: We could infiltrate the camp and fuck shit up.
>Player 2: Let me handle it. I roll Stealth!
>GM: Wait, do you bring anything?
>Player 2: lol I dunno
>GM: When do you do it?
>Player 2: uhhh, don't know either

The GM needs to know what Player 2 is trying to do. If he's trying to assassinate the chief, he'll need to go before twilight. If he's trying to burn the camp down it's in his interest to wait until nightfall, when the warchief is away, but he'll need a way to set things on fire.

Trying to guess your player's methods on their intent alone will result in "wait, I didn't mean to do this" conversations and either awkward retcons or animosity.

Same goes for diplomatic interaction.

>one part states a course of action that is resolved by stating an intent, then testing success with dice rolls
>but the same does not apply to diplomatic means, because you have a obvious double standard

Well, you are free to run a game however you want. That's the best part of this kind of game. You can run the game like that and the other person can run how they want. Even better, no one is obligated to play in anyone's games.

Have you given the characters any information that would give them an angle to haggle from?

>Look user, I don't want robots in my fantasy setting. I'm already putting up with your tiny clockwork automatons and that's enough for me.
Mature, reasonable response.

>[Snickering] Sure user! Roll Intelligence Arcana! Hahaha. Just kidding, no matter the result I'm not going to let you build a robot, but I won't tell you no, instead I'll significantly cripple your character until you can discern the meaning of my bullshit.
Passive aggressive dick move.

I agree.

>"I want to steal from this guy"
>He's sitting with his mandolin at the edge of the fountain: there is a small crowd of people around him, looking right at him.
>"I roll stealth"
>Alright, you approach the crowd stealthily and manage to sneak into the crowd in front of the musician. What do you do next?
>"What do you think? I roll stealth to steal from him"
>...you try to sneak up to the guy and pick his coinpurse? While there are a dozen people watching him?
>"I rolled a 19"
>A couple of guys from the crowd grab your shoulders and ask you what the fuck you think you're doing.

This is how a situation with a retard should be handled.

I have been running the exact same roll for a few years and it also gets rid of that extremely annoying "I roll perception" question. YOU LOOK AROUND. When there is cause for careful examination we'll get back to perceiving things.

Also, about the persuasion thing: you may be the most honey-voiced smooth-tongued motherfucker in the world, but you're gonna need SOME train of logic before I allow a roll. This doesn't require you to be diplomatic, but it does require you to think of a reason of why they should be persuaded or dissuaded.

You're comparing apples and oranges here. A situation analogous with the haggle example would be this:
"I roll stealth."
"Why?"
"I'm trying to sneak into the camp, duh."
"How are you sneaking into the camp?"

No, no, I can safely say that I was always the cunt in every game I've been in.

I don't know what you're trying to prove with that example though.

Well, the rolling stealth thing is obviously "when it's dark and no one is looking" but I don't allow people saying they roll a skill anyway. You tell me what you do, I'll tell you what you roll.

Sorry, I meant to quote

>it does require you to think of a reason of why they should be persuaded or dissuaded
And if the player can't think of one, they are barred from using the mechanics their character possesses?
Have you ever haggled before? You don't need to "persuade" someone, you offer a counterprice, because what people in games forget is that the seller WANTS you to buy his shit.
GMs who treat shops like a hoarder's nest are the worst.

Remember to pat all doggos

>"I roll stealth, I want to infiltrate the camp"
is to
>"I want to infiltrate the camp, I roll stealth"

what
>"I roll persuasion, I want to get a lower price"
is to
>"I want to get a lower price, I roll persuasion"

All four statements need a method anyway.

I agree with not allowing players to just declare a roll, I disagree with demanding detailed action when a fuzzy one will do. In the original example, the player saying "I'm trying to haggle down the price" should really be enough unless you have something in my mind and threw him a specific hook.

Both actions, when you distill them to what they actually are, consist of a stated goal, and the roll in order to attempt that goal.
>"I am rolling stealth to sneak into the camp"
is not inherently different from
>"I am rolling diplomatics to get a more favorable price"
But one gets demands for the player to offer more than what is called for at a pnp baseline, and those people smugly act as though doing it any other way makes you a ROLLPLAYER.
Basically, what said.
Stating your intent, along with what you would like to use to succeed at it, should be enough. Demanding more is not the GM's job unless more is needed to properly adjudicate the end result, and it's usually not.
I love rp, and think it makes pnp gaming worthwhile, but I do not force my players to do it. Shit, I've had times where my mind just seized up or I was too tired to shoot for the moon like I normally do. It's ok to not excel.

>I try to get him to lower the price
And where did you get the idea this implies haggling?
Lowballing the price works, but this could also mean threatening to shop somewhere else, persuading the merchant to help a noble cause, promising to pay half now and half later, subtly insinuating you'll ruin his reputation if he says no, etc., all of which should be Persuasion rolls, with varying difficulty and consequences.

The fact you automatically go to "well, the PC is going to haggle!" already reveals the issue with assuming your players' methods.

Of course. But if you value a blowjob at 3 silvers considering the factors involved and it reduces the price with 1 gp. that's a lowering of price.

You can't make the knight (female) ahegao with your monster cock, gnoll, it always derails the game.

This is why you don't play class based systems.

Only 1 gp? I roll seduction to increase the value of my blowjob.