Red flags

>Grimdark realistic setting
>secular paladin
>"female" Gnoll
>archaic spelling
>meta playing allowed

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_clergy
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>Posts on Veeky Forums

Unironically, this. I have yet to met a sane fa/tg/uy player.

I somehow lucked out as most of the first batch I found here in a gamefinder thread (~3.5 yrs ago) was fine and I've been playing with them ever since

fpbp

>secular paladin
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_clergy

not that weird

>sandbox campaign
>players purposefully avoid plot hooks because they don't want to be railroaded
>crits on skill checks
>treats common knowledge (trolls are weak to fire) as metagaming or alters the creature just by lazily inverting what they do (trolls are weak to cold and get a boost from fire)
>No call, no show for three sessions in a row
>Always pulls out the book to check up on a ruling for 5-10 minutes at a time but then gets mad when people are on their phone while he checks the rules.
>Openly hates rollplayers and is convinced that any discussion on the game's rules makes you a power gamer
>browses Veeky Forums
>uses alignments in games that aren't D&D
>introduces a GMPC who is unstated.
>abuses rule 0 to win every argument to cover up the fact that he doesn't actually know the rules.
>using edgy shit (murder, rape, child abuse, etc.) for no reason
I could write a fucking book honestly on the amount of red flags I developed between shit games and stories about shit games.

>tabletop gaming

>vampyre
>wytch
>daemon
>magick
>wyrm
>grimoire
>gryphon
>faerie
>djinni

>There character from their last game is a multi class.

Can explain all their feats and stats, but has no backstory to it.

...

Most of those are actual spellings of things, you half-wit. Pic related.

>archaic spelling
In before Vel--

Sorry, in after.

Hey. Secular paladins make sense if secular heaven and secular hell exist.

>not playing nobledark

>Apparent illiteracy and frequent misspellings of common words or flat out bad grammar
>Anyone who is a braggart or showcases encyclopedic knowledge about something, double when it wasn't even being discussed in the first place
>"I didn't know you were talking to me" When establishing the setting or an event where all party members are present
>Talking to random NPCs the DM never gets into character, they either do absolutely nothing or you get an OOC response
>No rules fudging to allow for "realistic" or "equivalent" actions (IE A fighter with multiple attack a round can't swap 1 attack for a simple acrobatics movement)
>Believing dice should never be fudged to facilitate the most enjoyable group narrative, at least for otherwise game-changing/secret rolls
>Doesn't show any interest in players' well being beyond the game itself
>PVP allowed
I wanna add "Describes character sexually and emphasizes it during play" but so far those who have done it were the better players in their groups. So I guess, white flag? Probably just stupidly lucky there.

Are we all the red flags anons?

>GM uses critical fumbles

>>Believing dice should never be fudged to facilitate the most enjoyable group narrative, at least for otherwise game-changing/secret rolls
Fudging is just pandering to sore losers who didn't plan ahead well enough, and a crutch for uninventive/railroader GMs. The answer is not to fudge dice to provide a desired story but to have enough creativity to weave a good story out of whatever the dice give you. This includes an interesting follow-on for PC death and even for a TPK.


>>Doesn't show any interest in players' well being beyond the game itself
I don't really know what to make of this. I mean, on the one hand I'm not your care-worker. I'm under no obligation to listen to someone complain about their out-of-game hardships. On the other hand, someone who won't lift a finger to help someone they just played a game with out of some immediate problem is probably an asshole and I wouldn't want to play with them.

>GM uses critical fumbles in a 1d6 system and they also occur on modified rolls of 1s, not just a natural 1

Key word in the first is never. I do agree that the dice are there for a bloody reason and its why I will never touch freeform rp. And that great players will find a way out of nearly any situation.
But at the same time people are here to have fun. Sometimes you run a string of particularly bad luck, or maybe people don't want to play a campaign for another 2 months so someone can have a satisfying ending because a dice roll is preventing it at this moment. I haven't run into this often myself, but I find that those who spout out that the dice are immutable just aren't fun to play with in general. And hey sometimes they are, it's a red flag, not an end all.

2nd isn't about being anyone's therapist or helper. Just a basic "How've things been" will do just fine, I get that people like to keep game life and other aspects separate. Though we're still people y'know? I can tell when someone is just using me as an AI dummy for a book or something. Or again, just a general douche.

That's the thing. All the good players already have groups here, possibly in early gamefinders. You're quite unlikely to find the good ones anymore.

This, pretty much. the reason randos always seem like crazed idiots not indicative of the regular userbase is because the regular userbase has already gotten a group of people they play with regularly. What's left floating around is the pack of twits and asshats who can't function socially to save their lives. You occasionally run into a sane person who's wandered into that swamp by accident, but they get snapped up fast by a pack of sane regulars who need a fifth.

Met my whole group here. It's working out fine.

The first five are obnoxious. The last four are fine.

>pandering to sore losers who didn't plan ahead well enough
If the 'sore losers' are having fun then the GM is doing it right.

Hey if either of you guys wants an online player, let me know. I'm already in a group but I've got more time available.

I'm normal I promise.

What’s wrong with wyrm and grimoire? They’re not obnoxious misspellings.
Unless Veeky Forums has a war on synonyms.

How bad have your experiences with critical fumbles been?

Dice are literally just crutches for players and GMs who don't want to have to think.

Some of the best combat I've played has been in entirely diceless wargame systems.

>This is Mortos Vivos!
>He's an cuh-razy "human" Artificer!
>Also totally not my self-insert character!
>This is his pet android dragon Ragnarok!
>Oh he's also God.
Hey Kevin, on the off chance you're here, fuck you.

oh, wait, I forgot.
In addition to being crutches, they are also trigger the gambling response, to better trap people into irrationally liking the dice.

>diceless wargame systems
Care to share user? I am curious as to what diceless war game systems exist.

sadly, I've played so many fucking games over the years that I have forgotten the names and places.
I can tell you though that damage wasn't based on a die roll, but was based on positioning, weapon, and troop disposition. That shit's nice.

Also, I could cop out with the troll answer of chess or checkers, but I'm not going to, because they much more recent games, and I don't actually like chess much.

>sadly, I've played so many fucking games over the years that I have forgotten the names and places.
Damn. Well you might still derive some joy from/be able to contribute to a little discussion about diceless systems right here

Yeah, sorry.
I spend a lot of my time these days trying to remember what that fucking game I want to play is.

Like, there is a mech game on the SNES I want to play, but I can't for the life of me rememeber what it was called. I keep thinking "genocyber", but that's not it, that's an anime.

This is literally one autist that makes that same post as a thread every day. Tg isn't a fucking hive mind.
If you can't roll with a bit of bad luck you don't deserve your "fun"

Assault Suit Valken? Aka Cybernator
Genocyber is good too

Cybernator looks like it. I only fucking got to rent this game once.
Thank you, user. I feel like I should reciprocate, but don't know how.

Have you played front mission: gun hazard? It's got similar gameplay, but is in fact an RPG, with customizable mech shit.

Of course, I played every Front Mission I think. Where are the good mech ttrpgs user?

>playing online
Nah. Only people who play online are the crazies who burned all their bridges with the locals already.

Guaranteed fucking replies.

>crossgender play
>crossspecies play
>crossalignment play
>crossintelligence play
Yes, I'm serious

>If you can't roll with a bit of bad luck you don't deserve your "fun"
Yes you do.
Whole point of these games is to have fun. If you're not having fun then what's the point?

Consider some people simply live in Wyoming farmland/Siberia/semi uplifted regions of the third world and thus have no locals, but they deserve playing too

There are no locals in my town. All anyone does is play Magic at a shitty video game store.

>good mech ttrpgs
nowhere.

>crossintelligence play
Holy fuck 1000x this. There is nothing fucking worse than the biggest moron in your group "roleplaying" a smart character and then snorting and having to stop the game to show everyone some facebook meme about bernie that is "omg so true" in the next breath. Fucking goddamn retarded assholes I hate you so much.

>"Morality" grey male character who does down right evil and selfish shit. But, it's okay because he's doing the "hard choices" that " needs to be done."

>tfw I literally do this
To be fair, if you have even a single point of the relevant skill you will never ever encounter a critical failure.

I guarantee there is a game within an hour of you

Literally everyone I've played with for well over 5 years frequents Veeky Forums and at least half of them are sane-ish..

Why are mechs given so much shit?
Mech games have been dry lately on vidya.
Mech games have been dry lately on tabletop.

No mechs for anyone.

Winning isn't fun by itself, it's the adversity that makes it fun IF you win. The "if" is key. If you revealed to your player after game that that grenade blast should have killed him, or that that feat of strength was fudged and he actually failed it, I have the feeling most if not all people would feel all feeling of pride and accomplishment vanish right there, retroactively, the whole deal would be less fun. Sure you can trick your players into thinking what they're doing actually had stakes, but I don't think you SHOULD do that. It's immoral. And if they catch you doing it, even once, that feeling of "what does it matter if I roll well or poor here" will never go away.
Yeah..

>but I don't think you SHOULD do that. It's immoral
If they're having fun then you're doing it right

>And if they catch you doing it, even once, that feeling of "what does it matter if I roll well or poor here" will never go away.
I think we play with very different people.

Oh no, they will lose the illusion that their gambling has an effect!
Whatever shall we do!

>People who only ever play slightly altered versions of themselves in RPGs

I just don't understand this.

>all feeling of pride and accomplishment
People don't really feel pride or accomplishment for rolling a very high number. They feel pride or accomplishment for having a good idea.
And you're much more proud of your good idea when it actually works, rather than failing due to bad dice rolls.

You're absolutely right. Fudging is a bad GMing habit. And like with any bad habit, people come out of the woodwork to defend it.

Are you kidding? dice are the bad habit.
Especially dice who's range of values eclipse the actual bonuses players have for being good at a thing.

Don't try to argue with him, user.
There are more plebs than you, dice will always be more popular than chess. Even if you illegalize dice.

They literally cannot stop gambling.

>vampyre
don't use

>wytch
remove forever

>daemon
can be pretty cool

>magick
not the worst, but why?

>wyrm
The "meh" of words

>faerie
good for scaerie faeries

>djinni
the plural of djinn?

It is very rare that the players end up in a situation where they NEED to succeed at one specific check. When it does happen, things get really tense.

Well, unless the GM fudges, in which case things stay low on the excitement scale.

Yes, things do get real tense when you are gambling. It's an easy way to generate cheap tension.

It's much more difficult to make tension when things do what they are supposed to do with regularity.

See
>It is very rare that the players end up in a situation where they NEED to succeed at one specific check.
To clarify for you and the other small-minded plebs who may be reading: this obviously works best when such situations arise organically. If they're forced by the GM, it is indeed cheap. Just as bad as railroading or fudging dice.

They are equally cheap if they are forced by the dice.

This is why gambling games immediately lose their charm when you take away the gambling. They had very little there, besides the gambling.

The "gambling" is just for randomization sake you know. You seem to think gambling is a bad thing at the core, when in the tabletop it's just an abstraction for unaccountable factors.
Again, what is a good idea worth if it could never fail? Is your life worth anything if you can't lose it?
This I can agree with, the dice shouldn't carry the character.
Chess is a puzzle game for two and there is no skill involved, only memorization.

The gambling is for randomization sake, yes. That is how gambling works. It randomly decides who wins and loses to produce cheap, easy to replicate, almost skill free fun. Even the biggest of idiots can roll a dice high.

However, if you remove the gambling from a system dependent on gambling, it suddenly becomes extremely boring. Because there wasn't much there in the first place.

>Well, unless the GM fudges, in which case things stay low on the excitement scale.

But that's the exact opposite of truth.

In reality, people win at uninteresting moments and lose at uninteresting moments. Reality doesn't follow the rules of good storytelling. In reality, your PCs should die in simple ally fights to NPCs that just happened on them at the wrong time. But lots of people play TTRPGs to escape reality, so fudging a die roll to keep the story going is sometimes better than letting the die tell a shitty story. I'm not saying to ignore dice entirely and only tell the story you want. But I believe there is a middle ground. Where you let the die tell the story 9/10 times, but you step in as DM on that 10th to keep things interesting.

Have you tried freeform RP? It sounds like that is what you're looking for if that is your opinion on dice.

Um, "freeform roleplaying"? It's just "roleplaying" the only artificial part is your retarded addiction to rolling stupid little cubes any time you want to beg for permission to play the game. You're probably white, aren't you?

Guy playing as paladin girl. If she is cute, shy and he just had to mention she isn't straight then it's all but guaranteed it will become a shitshow.

wew

user, "diceless" and "freeform" are so different that you must be an idiot.

Um, stop using the f word, virgin.

fuckoff with whatever you are trying to do here. I am much too old to try to comprehend your fucking shenanigans.

>live in Wyoming farmland/Siberia/semi uplifted regions of the third world
>deserve playing
No. Pick one

To think I was baited hard enough to respond to this idiot.
But you're letting the dice govern you instead of adapting to them. Why can't the PC get knocked out in an alley? He walked there himself and he knew the risk. Every action is deliberate and should carry its own consequences, for good and bad outcomes.

>the plural of djinn?

Genie

I know you can't really live in three parts of the globe at once but give me a break ok

I don't want to make a thread for my singular question
Which David Gemmel book should I read first?

...Is that not how you're supposed to spell grimoire?

And what is the plural of genie mister autist

I think this is generally a reasonable and smart post.

However I still have a couple gripes with what you've said here. First off, I don't think it's even possible for PCs to die in an uninteresting fight. Sure, the GM might have originally intended to do a throwaway fight, but if a PC dies then that fight has become quite consequential.

As for "fudging to keep the story going", I think that's just fine in an ideal case. In my experience though GMs sometimes just use it as an excuse. Good GMs will let things go a little off script, stray a little ways from their comfort zone, and generally let the game take on a life of its own -- and in the end make a smart adjustment to reel things back in. Others just fudge to keep things exactly according to plan, and that to me is really disappointing.

>>djinni
>the plural of djinn
The other way around

Diceless games might still have a randomization mechanic and I don't want to trigger that user's turboautism any further.

yeah, they might, but they don't need 'em.

Whatever, fucking white males like yourself never fucking take responsibility for spreading the fucking oppression that you fucking spread everywhere

goddamn, why does the concept of a game that does not include dice or cards and instead resolves conflicts with things like static damage values or skill VS challenge degrees of success make you two go nuts like this?

Fuck you, collaborator. Colonize somewhere else

Yeah, what is this newfangled shit?
back in my day, people put EFFORT into these things.

Back in your day you had women and people of color so tightly oppressed that you never had to put effort into a single fucking thing since the moment your mother brought you into this world you literal fucking nazi

is that not how you spell Gryphon?

I am still confused by what this newfangled trolling is, and what prompts it, but my curiosity is slowly being overwhelmed by distaste and desire to play games.

Modern politics have made things too easy for trolls. The newest crop of Australian shitposters will be lazy and uncreative and all of Veeky Forums will suffer for it.

I've never run into more than one genie desu

Any time the DM doesn't want to let me HIT THE MONSTER REEEEEAL GOOD!

>pretending not to support oppression
Nice try, the color of your skin says it all

Man, I guess. I just am used to these things requiring like, some kind of prompting of some sort, and not just randomly occurring in the most low effort format possible.

>benefits from a system of slavery over women and people of color his entire life
>calls anything else low effort

BCG, my dude.