Shit GMs say

>If your characters die, you wont be able to partake in the campaign anymore.

dude. It's supposed to be a long running campaign and you only have 4 players at best to invite

Other urls found in this thread:

chick.com/reading/tracts/0046/0046_01.asp
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>I'll take 'Stuff that never happened' for 500 please, Alex

>die
>you're still required to show up to every session for the next 2 years

the reasoning was
>so you put effort and care into the only character you can make. and dont do stupid shit

Is your group that shit or is it the GM?

Nah. We can't have gamers be responsible and intelligent... what the fuck is the world coming to?

he is inexperienced at worst.
but things like pc having no clue about their surroundings and foes or forgetting details dont happen as frequently / dont cause such big problems when i GM

>i need a smoke break

>whos got pitch on pizza?

>dude i wish could tell you this cool shit i thought of

>i need a smoke break

Shit mate, not giving your GM the time he needs to adjust the style of the game after the players made a major decision and by doing that, validating their decisions as characters in an living and free world.

i dont understand what you mean. are you saying GM's dont say this?

>playing with smokers

>not ending the session with a nice smooth cigarrette to help you relax and reflect on the session

>every player intentionally does stupid shit to die in the first session
>they all form a new group by themselves and don't invite you
>you're left with nothing, you sulk in your basement and cry every would-have-been-game-night because you've lost all your players due to your autism and they told everyone at the LGS what a fucking weirdo you are so no one is willing to join your games ever again

I'm saying, if the GM says he needs a break he probably needs a break, he is a player of the game just as you are and does it for his own entertainment.

oooh you thougt i meant it negatively

nah man i was just saying stuff gms say lol, no negative connotations intended

Oh, thanks for clearing that up. I just thought that it was on the context of the thread "shit GMs says" as in: bad GMs say things like this.

Have a great day chap.

you too man

>Yes, I know you did great with that sense motive check, but since [character] himself believed the stuff he told you, you read him as honest, which he was.

He telling please do not make me kill you - LOL- Those GMs are the worst, The game dies soon do to the silly stuff the GM well then pull out to keep players from dying

but this makes sense, his motive was pure, not his words

this desu

It might make sense, but it completely fucks over a party who then relies upon the statement despite doing their best to check it for accuracy. It's pretty much a way to screw over players 'fairly'.

That sounds familiar.

chick.com/reading/tracts/0046/0046_01.asp

Indeed, a proper gentleman relaxes with a cool beer.

yeah but thats just the way life is, its roleplaying, not rollplaying

Its almost as if there is a difference between sensing motives and sensing truth.

>>If your characters die, you wont be able to partake in the campaign anymore.

Shit players say
>If my character dies, I'm not making another one. I'd rather not play than make another character.

sounds reasonable, you just sound like a whiny bitch

It's almost as if it is a story and not everyone is omnipotent.

>Not smoking
>2017

My DM run high-lethality game where dying was punishable by buying him bottle of wine, mean or somesuch. It worked pretty well, desu.

what did your character's parents look like?

To be honest smoking is a habit that does not exist in the upper strata of the society, it's mostly a low education thing

>guy was GMing his first campaign in like 5 years
>party of 5 players and 2 dmpcs split up into like 4-5 groups across two different dungeons
>clusterfuck of party swapping and separate actions
>eventually all grouped up to escape
>everyone escaped, except one player was still stuck in the dungeon because the GM forgot about him and didn't give him a chance to do any actions

Absolute nonsense. They just hide their smoking.

>"I'd really appreciate if you guys RP your characters."
>"This NPC has like a scraggly voice, I'm not actually going to do it though just imagine it."

Some people have actual shit vocal range and no seeming ability to improve despite trying, sadly.

Scraggly is just a placeholder honestly. Any type of voice that isn't his own is too much work apparently.

If by RP your GM means RP and not acting then that's alright. Not every table can be drama class: dice rolling edition.

When we started he asked us what our characters sound like and expects just that.

>running games with drama/theater/literature majors in college

>Your character will never die and you can't make a new one.
>Your character wouldn't do that, instead they would do [X].
>Your argument is flawless and there's no evidence against you but the judge finds you guilty anyway. He detects as Lawful Good.
>Your Lawful Good bard would never demand payment for any service they provide, so you can't make money through Profession or Performance rolls or ask for rewards for quests. Also everyone in the party has to be Lawful Good.
>Yes, you rolled a 37 or higher on all your Knowledge checks against this enemy but you still don't know anything about it.
>Just stop rolling Knowledge checks, I know you put all your skill points into them but I'm not telling you what the monsters are, figure it out yourself.
>Hey, I only said PHB only for PLAYER characters. The GMPCs can be whatever I feel is appropriate.

All the same guy. Worst GM I've ever had, and that's counting the guy who let me get Party Killed for no reason within 15 minutes of the first session.

I'd skip out after the second one.

>my character controlled light magic, i tried to hire a lensmaker to help me make a laser cannon
>gm was very wary of me ever since i obliterated another campaign with a busted character
>he just kept telling me i can't do it. i asked for a concrete reason:
>"i don't want this campaign to reach ridiculous scales of power!"
>let one player's backstory be that he stole fire magic from the gods
>said player murdered a dragon in the third session
>got away with murdering british guardian spirits, casting britain into eternal winter
>new player joined, his character was a literal demigod. GM did not object
>encounter several renowned golem artisans in a palace.
>at this point we're all loaded because the we know the emperor himself
>i ask them if i could commission a piece from them, money is no object
>GM instantly has them all run away and tells us we have to go meet with the king now

>Hey, I only said PHB only for PLAYER characters. The GMPCs can be whatever I feel is appropriate.
this one is at least reasonable. he gets 1/7

>GMPC

>Reasonable

The last one is how a good group plays btw

>ad hominem reddit space attack
i don't think GMPCs = death of player agency if it's done right personally, but yeah i get why everyone hates them
>tfw the best GMPC i've ever had was a sentient car

I wish I had too. Wasted literal years on his trash GMing because Roll20 didn't exist yet and finding an English-speaking game where I live is basically impossible.

His GMPC was a D&D 3.5 Warblade who fought with (and performed Maneuvers with) matchlock pistols in an otherwise 8th century tech setting. Still think it's reasonable when compared to the party Monk?

So it's fine to restrict the PCs to Player's Handbook Only and full casters banned, but it's okay for the rest of the world to include Warblades, Sorcerers, Psions, and so forth? How are the PCs important or interesting in your story when 80% of adventurers are better than them in every way, and would in fact complete this quest in hours instead of months if the GM didn't have them refuse to help at every turn?

GMPCs can be great. The game I'm currently in has an ocean-themed Cleric who manages party funds, arranges our transportation, and is generally a real help in combat. She's always half the party's level so it never feels like the GM is trying to upstage us. The GM has given us several chances to leave her behind and seek other 'hirelings' but we've grown attached to her.

What's the problem here?

I think it's just meant to be frustrating? But it's frustrating in a dramatic way, so I dunno

see

Guilty of the last one sometimes, my roommate is one of the players and sometimes I get excited when I'm working on stuff.

Sense Motive is a non-magical ability. How are you supposed to know someone's lying if he himself doesn't know?

He's assblasted because the DM added some dramatic tension to the narrative. He's confessing to being a crybaby, basically

i assumed his character was stupid, but exotic GMPCs aren't inherently bad imo

the car GMPC is pretty silly. it's self driving so it's the perfect getaway vehicle, it can pick up supplies on it's own, but it's programmed to obey the laws of robotics so you can't attach weaponry to aimbot or run over people intentionally

You're not wrong, but on the other hand, what's the point in having the skill if there's no guarantee it will work and even clear success can be nullified by what is essentially DM fiat?

>what's the point in having the skill if there's no guarantee it will work

I don't think a possibility of failure makes things not worthwhile.

The skill did work. It wasn't DM fiat. You were misinformed. Do you also get angry when someone gets the wrong answer on a TV Quiz show? Of course you do, you're posting on Veeky Forums

>235 respondents
I don't even disagree but that's a crap sample size.

People don't tend to lie on anonymised questionnaires. It also makes total sense, the middle and upper classes are far more receptive to public health campaigns.

GMPCs aren't inherently bad, and I made that point. What I'm saying is that is wrong, it's not reasonable for a GM to restrict the Fighter to crappy 1d8 + 3 longsword swings every turn while his GMPC is busting out flaming energy swipes and performing sick counter attacks while sporting an equal AC and hit points. I think there's a special place in hell reserved for GMs who make GMPCs that are just other PCs, only better in every way and constantly showing them up as a sign of dominance.

I use gmpcs because my group is two people bit and some ghosting asshole.

But i treat them fairly, though one of my players hates them with a passion.

If you believe the tv that's because of profiling.

If you're trying to tell if someone's lying or having hidden motives, that's Sense Motive or whatever.
If you're trying to tell whether a fact is true, that's a passive Knoweldge (Topic) check (or whatever 3e uses) to determine whether you can immediately tell it's false.
Then you can also do a regular Knowledge (Topic) check if you're doing, say, research in a library, to determine how good you are at information gathering.
Obviously it's up to the DM to hint at the veracity of information, whether it's mistakes in NPC exposition or traps in dungeon.

Can someone explain this "reddit spacing" meme? I genuinely don't understand what it is or why it's such a big deal.

Big spaces between lines from what I can tell

>actions have consequences
haha sure they do, buddy

sure they do

It's not really a big deal.

It just gets on people's nerves for some reason.

People on Reddit space their posts like this, apparently.

I wouldn't know, I don't browse it often.

you have to double space to make new lines in reddit and if you post on reddit long enough you start to double space things out of pure habit

the meme is that you can identify reddit users because they double space nonstop

reminds me of a campaign i ran
>player was bound by magic code to follow specific orders
>perpetually kept trying to loophole around the wording of the orders
>interrogates a guy and uses truth magic or some shit
>literal words were "are there any more of you onboard?"
>guy responds no, magic deems it to be a truthful statement
>later on the npc's friends show up
>player calls me out on this
>"he told you the truth. there are no more of HIM on the ship besides him. nothing wrong with this statement"
>proceeds to argue with me about how that line of reasoning is bullshit

Perfectly reasonable.

1. If you've ruined a prior campaign (or even if you haven't) the GM saying that something is too powerful for his world is an acceptable meta-reason for vetoing something.
2. How does your character know that concentrated light will make a laser? And how does he know the dimensions and shape of the lens which will create this effect?

Where/when was this survey possibly done? 77.9% of the respondents don't drink? 63.4% are married, and only 12.7% are divorced? And wouldn't

Marketing major here, the fact that you got 81 female non-smokers and 33 male non-smokers is a rather large variance. The 29 to 15 male/female smoker ratio isn't incredibly horrible but it DOES skew things and it brings me into question where and how this survey was conducted. You can very easily skew the data any way you want by sampling at, say, an area around a women's university.

I'm not saying this study is wrong, I'm just saying the sample they got could be wildly different from the city it was taken in, not to mention the state/province/country. I live in the wealthiest most anglo part of Quebec, if I did a survey on education level, income, and feelings on a referendum they'd be massively different from a survey done 5 km. down the road.

It's the unfortunate truth that surveys like this are only really true about the location they were immediately performed in, and sometimes not even that. And I hate smoking so that has nothing to do with it.

Playing D&D with beers and pizza is even less of an upper class thing.

I like to smoke weed with my group, what social class does that depict me as?

When your GM is more scared of you with a box of scraps then he is of a Dragonslayer and a Demigod, he probably has good cause.
I do the same with my players. One, the least creative guy you will ever meet, could walk in with a character sheet saying he knows every spell that has ever existed and I'd let him play it. Another I think twice about giving him a rope because he will probably find a way to trick the enemy into hanging themselves with it.

>dude i wish could tell you this cool shit i thought of
I run my players separately but in the same setting (This is much easier to pull off over internet chat.), and I regularly discuss my plans for the other players with the guys I know won't leak anything or metagame.

>1. If you've ruined a prior campaign (or even if you haven't) the GM saying that something is too powerful for his world is an acceptable meta-reason for vetoing something.
yeah, he was definitely in the right by not giving me a solar beam. i just wanted something more flavorful than "no you can't"
i was more salty about the GM basically not letting me do anything except cast flare on enemies while letting everyone else be actual demigods

>2. How does your character know that concentrated light will make a laser? And how does he know the dimensions and shape of the lens which will create this effect?
laser is a poor word, it was more of a glorified magnifying glass. my character wouldn't know much about lensmaking, hence why he sought out craftsmen to help him.
he knows at least the concept because it the campaign took place in a historical setting past the development of optics, and my character was a well educated doctor

To be fair, PHB full casters should be banned when playing 3.5. But the best way to balance the system is honestly just to ban core material in general.

Bring disguises, cardstock fake IDs and new PCs. After you die put on a disguise at the table and take out a fake ID and character sheet. You now can continue play.

But that's not true because double spacing has existed long before reddit.

>If your characters die, you wont be able to partake in the campaign anymore.
No one says this.

>high-lethality game
>if a PC dies, the player must give the GM a gift

in a short campaign it would be doable

He's probably the kind of character who would get mad when a poorly-worded Wish backfired on him, too. In other words, a massive faggot.

It's almost like chan's witch hunting of redditfags is not entirely logical.

Anti-smoking propaganda has been built from the ground up on erroneous and twisted statistics and, in many cases, outright fucking lies. This is nothing new for these people.

>Can someone explain this "reddit spacing" meme?
just ignore it, it's spouted by idiots who try to force the meme

No, redditfags are still scum for the most part. The illogical part is how certain types use the word "reddit" to mean "thing I don't like", diluting and obfuscating the word and the reasoning behind the criticism of said redditfags.

The conspiracy theorist in me wants to say that this is actually the long-term plan of a Redditor of above-average intelligence, to normalize and breed acceptance of Reddit customs and patterns on an anonymous imageboard. The realist in me says it's just more newfags running more buzzwords into the ground because they're fucking dumb.

>implying the GM should also play a character
>implying the GM needs more screentime than he already has
>implying that "GMPCs" doesn't carry negative connotations and that useful sidecharacters aren't called "party henchman" or "support NPC"

My nog.

I can barely handle managing a consistent world with NPCs that can, for the most part, be accurately described in a sentence to a paragraph, i don't see how a person could do that AND have a meaningful long term party member, all while keeping them entirely seperate.

GM, can confirm.

Sounds like they weren't lying, they were wrong.

That said a good GM (so definitely not me, for one) will make sure to clearly state when knowledge is objectively true ("you hit for 4 damage") and when it's in-universe information ("they don't appear to be lying").

I usually respond to perception rolls with "you don't notice anything." By comparison, I respond to unneccesary perception rolls with "there is nothing here."

Oh yeah, and I use the "are you sure you want to do that" meme liberally. Not as a 'you're going off the rails' warning but to let players know that what they're about to do is irrevoccable.

your reasoning was
>so you put effort and care into your campaign world that you want people to see and participate in, and if a player loses a character they aren't allowed to see it ever again

Sounds good to me. If you die, you've got to bring some top-tier snacks next game or bring some minis. If nobody dies the GM does it.

You'd need a decent group who'd played together a while, though.

>>Just stop rolling Knowledge checks, I know you put all your skill points into them but I'm not telling you what the monsters are, figure it out yourself.

>Gazebo.jrpg

So you disagree with me? Because you can't imagine a multi-faceted character that doesn't take the screentime of the players for him/her/itself?

>Smoking GM's.
>Stops every 5-10 minutes for a smoke break

Jesus christ that fucking kills me everytime. Our shadowrun GM pulled that shit EVERY fucking session. Come to think of it, I think thats why we stopped playing(he was also often late).

If a guy's smoking every five to ten minutes, he's stressed as all hell. From what I've learned about Veeky Forums over the past decade, the biggest stressor GMs face is a group of terrible players.