Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Gadodel 03-18-05, 10:24 PM	One 'thing' per post... I'll start: 1. NPC's that don't follow the RAW.
Bulabase 03-18-05, 10:40 PM	2. Players who get their panties in a wad if my NPCs don't follow the RAW.
sorvikcorsair 03-18-05, 10:58 PM	3. Players who powergame the most rediculous things... ie a ninja dwarf from the mines with a jump of 60 ft... or a half giant psifighter knife wielder...
TheDarkestOfAngels 03-18-05, 11:03 PM	4. Players who cheat either by fudging their own rolls during play or by not following the character generation guidelines you set for them to follow.
Bulabase 03-18-05, 11:03 PM	4. Players who show up late, or worse, not at all.
Gadodel 03-18-05, 11:08 PM	6. Carrying around too many books
twad 03-18-05, 11:24 PM	What is RAW??? 7- stuff like: walking arsenals, ikilleverybody, excessive power gamers ect 8- running out of munchies
Gadodel 03-18-05, 11:29 PM	What is RAW??? Rules as Written
Lina_Inverse 03-18-05, 11:42 PM	9.Gms who cheat for the sake of there "plot." 10.Gms who define a plot and force it down your throat. 11.dmpc's or hero syndrome. take i guess what i hate :P
sorvikcorsair 03-19-05, 12:07 AM	12. Players who tell you their save or attack before their die hits the book. 13. DMs who think Kindar can gain a +80 to their sleight of hand rolls at level 8 and take your shirt, weapon, and armor off without you knowing. (Kindar was level 9)
RPGfish 03-19-05, 12:43 AM	14: n00bs 15: players who say "I did it and it don't matter 'cause I did it and you ain't gonna stop me" in a Texan accent. 16: Cheaters in general.
HomebrewedMonster 03-19-05, 12:56 AM	Following the guidelines of the thread (posting once). 17. A player that insists to fight through every encounter.
PurdueDave 03-19-05, 01:39 PM	18. People who play CN as behaving like a random number generator under the pretense that this is how to play it.
PurdueDave 03-19-05, 01:40 PM	19. deus ex machina http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=deus+ex+machina&x=13&y=4
Bulabase 03-19-05, 02:48 PM	20. Players who don't know what their own spells/special abilities do.
Lord Tarran 03-19-05, 03:38 PM	21. Players who lie about their rolls, and then complain when they get caught for lying, and then blame you for it.
pseudoidiot 03-19-05, 03:41 PM	Following the guidelines of the thread (posting once). 17. A player that insists to fight through every encounter. i agree, but luckily that's extremely easy to fix. i had a party that was like that, kill first ask questions later. all it takes is some random encounters with things they have no chance against, where if they hide or stay hidden or ignore it, they come out fine. i was happy when they decided not to try anything to the Alhoon, i didnt really wanna dish out a TPK
Archus Forix 03-19-05, 04:33 PM	22. GMs who are favourable to one PC than another
Red Knight 03-19-05, 04:49 PM	23. Players who know every monster in the universe on sight, and then shout it out to the table when it shows up. :rant: 24. Players who argue with you on every action you take. :headexplo 25. Players who cant create their own backgrounds more complicated than "He came from someplace and did things." :tantrum:
Lord Tarran 03-22-05, 06:32 PM	26. Players who argue every ruling and insist you reroll your dysjunction of their precious artifact.
SweetJay 03-22-05, 06:50 PM	27. dms who create npcs they love so much that every time they near death some miraculous thing saves them, or it turns out they have YET another escape spell or power
Bulabase 03-22-05, 06:54 PM	28. Players who are more focused on their March Madness pool than the game at hand.
kliate 03-22-05, 07:03 PM	29. Third party feats, classes, races, optional rules, items......that haven't been reviewed and approved by the DM.
Christman 03-22-05, 07:04 PM	30: Players who can't think of a character idea beyond "I wanna play as Goku/Sephiroth/some other random cult icon" then complain when they suck.
Edymnion 03-22-05, 07:08 PM	30: Players who can't think of a character idea beyond "I wanna play as Goku/Sephiroth/some other random cult icon" then complain when they suck.31: DMs that are so pre-occupied with their own mistaken preconceptions that they absolutely refuse to even consider a character that may have been inspired by a "Goku/Sephiroth/some other random cult icon" type character.
Jagermeister 03-22-05, 08:01 PM	32. Players or DMs who are entirely ignorant of the setting in which they are playing or running.
Lord Tarran 03-22-05, 09:22 PM	33. Rule Lawyering DM's when it comes to alignment.
Agent 34 03-22-05, 09:27 PM	33. DM's who favor a PC above all others...theres.
Christman 03-22-05, 09:31 PM	35. PC's who know how to abuse the Elan Metamind's Font of Power ability.
TheDarkestOfAngels 03-22-05, 09:36 PM	36: DMs and/or players that affiliate being "lawful" with being strictly law-obiding. DM: According to the laws of the crooked King of this country, Paladin, you must allow the police officer to remove the thief's hands. Pal: I stop the officer. DM: You what? Pal: I stop the officer and tell him that his theft wasn't successful and that he should be let free, though sternly punished, but not by cutting off his hands - that's cruel! DM: ooookay... you loose your lawful alignment and your paladinhood until you regain it. Ex-Pal: What? Thief: You should be morbidly chaotic neutral like me. Being chaotic means no alignment restrictions. -- while these events never happened to me, my oldest gaming group did, at least at one point in time, think like this. Blech.
Scarlet Knight 03-22-05, 09:50 PM	14: n00bsYou don't want new players in your game? Why not? :confused:
TheDarkestOfAngels 03-22-05, 09:58 PM	You don't want new players in your game? Why not? :confused: I've always felt that there is a difference between "n00bs" and "new players." a "n00b" is someone that: A. Perpetually requires hand-held guideance through any and all decision-making within a game. B. Refuses to make any decision on their own for one reason or another. C. Refuses to try to make any decision or learn anything new. a "new player" is ... well ... someone who liked the idea of the game enough to try it like anything else that any human would do. I actually had a "n00b" as per the above description in a game run by someone I know. VERY annoying. I believe that RPGfish was referring to this sort of person. If not, then, well, I'm wrong in that RPGfish was making that inference.
Slayers-CoA 12-15-05, 10:11 PM	37: DMs who insist on playing with a bunch of made-up rules, then killing players in-game when they ask questions about there rules. (This has happened to me. 38: DMs who break every single rule in the books, and beleive that the suprise round is an automatic critical hit when you attack. (This has happened to me also.)
DisposableHero_ 12-16-05, 02:07 AM	35. PC's who know how to abuse the Elan Metamind's Font of Power ability.39: Players's who try to convince a DM how a rule works without knowing themselves.Font of Power (Ps): A 10th-level metamind can act as a living cognizance crystal, producing seemingly endless power points once per day, for up to 1 minute. His eyes shine like tiny stars, and faint illumination seems to beam out of his mouth and the end of each of his fingers. While so empowered, he can manifest any of his powers without drawing from his power point reserve. He finds the power points he needs welling up within his own body. If a metamind using this ability enters a metaconcert, his power point reserve is accessed normally for the purpose of his contributing to the pool.• Resistance (Su): Elans can use psionic energy to increase their resistance to various forms of attack. As an immediate action, an elan can spend 1 power point to gain a +4 racial bonus on saving throws until the beginning of her next action. • Resilience (Su): When an elan takes damage, she can spend power points to reduce its severity. As an immediate action, she can reduce the damage she is about to take by 2 hit points for every 1 power point she spends.A) Font of Power only effects powers manifested, and does not provide any power points to use with the Elan's Racial abilities. B) The Elan Racial abilities are immediate actions, and as such can only be used once per round. C) God like power once per day at levels 15+ does not excuse being horribly cripplingly weak by comparison to any character of the same level for 23 hours and 59 minutes every day. Sorry for the rant, but this misreading of the rules is so common and irritating that it boils my blood, if you have someone trying to pull of this cheese in your game, let em know how the rules are really written, and strongly encourage them to skip the metamind PrC, their character will be terrible. 40: Players/DMs who judge ban and dismiss a system/splatbook/PrC/etc. without taking time to figure out how it actually works.
Always-Late 12-16-05, 02:18 AM	41: Players who expect you to look through everything in ten or twenty splatbooks so that they can use them.
WolfHati 12-16-05, 03:09 AM	42. Spiked chains, the manyshot feat, and anything that isn't just fantastic but so out of touch with believability or realistic physics as to be just silly.
Solaris 12-16-05, 05:19 AM	43. Eberron.
Wildonion 12-16-05, 08:32 AM	44. People who dislike Eberron (Unless of course they played it already and THEN decided they didn't like it.)
simon_tage 12-16-05, 10:04 AM	45. Gestalting.
Fargren 12-16-05, 10:46 AM	46. people that care more bout if the rules are bieng followed than if the gmae is being fun.
lord_blackfang 12-16-05, 11:01 AM	47. female players with male PCs who insist on roleplaying out gay sex scenes (happened more than once)
Grand Theft Otto 12-16-05, 11:24 AM	48) A campaign that models midieval europe and utterly ignores the presence of magic. Its a FANTASY world, not 1100 AD England where wizards, dragons, demons, angels and a ton of other stuff HAPPENED TO show up and not impact society, means of production, general health, etc. 49) Raise Dead 50) Alignment
Terjonwh 12-16-05, 11:52 AM	42. Spiked chains, the manyshot feat, and anything that isn't just fantastic but so out of touch with believability or realistic physics as to be just silly. But fireballs, dragons and vampires are just fine.
spoogemonkey 12-16-05, 03:04 PM	Travis
Solaris 12-16-05, 04:38 PM	51. People who, when someone says "x" on this kind of thread, reply with something along the lines of "people who don't like x". [Hey, there are three already; one more won't hurt.]
WolfHati 12-16-05, 04:54 PM	But fireballs, dragons and vampires are just fine. Those are magic. The things I listed aren't. I would have no problem with a length of chain that had been animated by magic to be used as a weapon, but a non-magical 10 ft. chain is just dumb and couldn't really ever work that well. And manyshot, even with magic, is stupid, since you could use the energy it takes to fire 2 arrows doing the same damage to fire a single arrow so that it does twice as much damage, with longer range to boot. Back to the list... 52. I don't want people who don't question me in the game (I make enough mistakes as is). 53. People who annoy others for the fun of it, or without realizing it and refuse to notice.
Fargren 12-16-05, 05:13 PM	54.people who postmore than one "thing" per thread when the OP speciafically requested them not to. 55. Hypocrits.
Always-Late 12-16-05, 05:30 PM	56. People who ever bring up role vs rollplaying.
Koga:The ninja trick 12-16-05, 05:45 PM	57. People who dismiss the psionics system as broken whilest thinking druids and clerics are okay. 58. People who refuse to acknowledge non-magick users get shafted. 59. Too many magick-users in the party, seriously, The Koga refuses to join a game where there is more then 1/3 magick-users (psionic or otherwise) in a playing group. 60. Forgotten Realms sept for The Lords of Nine, they're cool. 61. Greyhawk. 62. Eberonn. There, The Koga said it. :P
sandskimmer 12-16-05, 06:41 PM	Travis :confused: :confused: :confused:
sandskimmer 12-16-05, 06:42 PM	54.people who postmore than one "thing" per thread when the OP speciafically requested them not to. 55. Hypocrits. That, sir, is amusing.
Morbid 12-17-05, 01:21 AM	The one guy posted what he believes a "n00b" to be, but I consider a "n00b" to be a new player. What I hate are Railroading DMs and Munchkins.
Ralphius_Maximus 12-17-05, 03:10 AM	63. Players who insist that their PC's know as much about the monsters/settings as they do, and make absurd attempts to justify this knowledge "but he would know that because his second cousins wife's sister's best friend's grandmother was the high priestess of..."
Ivar the terrible 12-17-05, 04:24 AM	42. Spiked chains, the manyshot feat, and anything that isn't just fantastic but so out of touch with believability or realistic physics as to be just silly. 64: Dm's who agree with the above notion, thankfully mine does not. BTW to whomever dissed Ninja Dwarves. A dwarf could make a wicked Ninja.
Kursk 12-17-05, 11:52 AM	Players who couldn't role play save their life...
The Vorpal Tribble 12-17-05, 12:00 PM	#66. Drow, tiefling, vampires, demon bloodlines, drow bloodlines, or vampire bloodlines as player races.
SinChild 12-17-05, 01:37 PM	67. Lack of creativity, inability to RP, constant off topic conversations and a general attitude of "I don;t want to be here but everyone else is so I'll roll some damn dice."
Darkuwa 12-17-05, 01:45 PM	68: People who spell magic "magick" english got an update about 800 years ago, unless your using thee and though talk spell it magic. 69: Christianity references in a fantasy campaign. 70: Players with high whiney voices and bad hygiene. 71: People who bring their baby to the game. 72: People who act like babie's in game.
Greg_K 12-17-05, 06:08 PM	What don't I want in my game? Munchkins Powergamers Evil PC's Spiked Chains, Orgosh's, Gnomish Pick Hammers, etc. Halfling Riding Dogs Bizarre PrCs (e.g., Acolyte of the Skin, Oozemaster, etc) 99% of WOTC prestige classes 99% of the Alchemical Items 99% of the material from the Races of (x) Books 90+% of the material from the various Class splat books Monster classes Anything from the following: Book of Exalted Deeds Epic Level Handbook Psionics Handbook (expanded or 3.0) Magic of Incarnum Weapons of Legacy
lord_blackfang 12-17-05, 06:17 PM	What don't I want in my game? Munchkins Powergamers Evil PC's Spiked Chains, Orgosh's, Gnomish Pick Hammers, etc. Halfling Riding Dogs Bizarre PrCs (e.g., Acolyte of the Skin, Oozemaster, etc) 99% of WOTC prestige classes 99% of the Alchemical Items 99% of the material from the Races of (x) Books 90+% of the material from the various Class splat books Monster classes Anything from the following: Book of Exalted Deeds Epic Level Handbook Psionics Handbook (expanded or 3.0) Magic of Incarnum Weapons of Legacy You forgot Core. :rolleyes: :P
Rathik 12-17-05, 06:38 PM	You forgot Core. :rolleyes: :P :heehee Anyways, what I really hate in my game is... 73). When only one person in your group can RP really well, and all the other players avoid it. This makes for long sessions of me RPing with one player while the others pick the lint out of their navels. 73.5). DRUIDS. I mean, Wild Shape is cool and all, but it gets hard for me to come up with good challenges for the party once they hit high levels.
Greg_K 12-17-05, 07:00 PM	You forgot Core. :rolleyes: :P Lol. Actually, Core rules are not immune either :P Bard: Charm and Illusion spells only. I use the Bard variants from UA, but the variants lose access to several of the bard's roguish skills for their slightly wider spell access Cleric: no medium or heavy armor, hd d6, Good Save Will. Extra skill points. More limited shared list of common spells. Spontaneous Casting. Also available are the Cloistered Cleric and Champion of Good variants from UA. Druid: the PHB Druid is not used. I use both Green Ronin's Shaman class and a variant of the Cloistered Cleric in its place. For to Wild Shap, they need to take a PrC or use spells. Wizard: several spells including the Prismatics and Bigby's don't exist Wizard, Specialists: Specialists must use the alternate special abilities from UA.
larry_the_titan 12-17-05, 08:09 PM	Lol. Actually, Core rules are not immune either :P Bard: Charm and Illusion spells only. I use the Bard variants from UA, but the variants lose access to several of the bard's roguish skills for their slightly wider spell access Cleric: no medium or heavy armor, hd d6, Good Save Will. Extra skill points. More limited shared list of common spells. Spontaneous Casting. Also available are the Cloistered Cleric and Champion of Good variants from UA. Druid: the PHB Druid is not used. I use both Green Ronin's Shaman class and a variant of the Cloistered Cleric in its place. For to Wild Shap, they need to take a PrC or use spells. Wizard: several spells including the Prismatics and Bigby's don't exist Wizard, Specialists: Specialists must use the alternate special abilities from UA. I am confused are you sure that you can hate that much of the game and still play. I mean you just listed 90+% of the game. Anyway back to the thread at hand. 74: Munchkin DM. One of my previous friends wanted to DM but was new to the game. After getting all the information he thought he needed, he started to build the most complicated game ever for just his first game. Try thinking of a game set in Ebberon with the Core books plus all the complete and race books and any other source he could get his hands on. After he got all that put together even with all the sources this guy thought he didnt have enough information but started the game anyway. Here is a list of the things I know he didnt pay any mind or didnt understand. ECLs, spells, and Psionics. He favored his favorite class Monk. I could only put up with this guy for two games before I pulled out of the game. I still have nightmares about this guy trying to run the game.
Greg_K 12-17-05, 11:39 PM	I am confused are you sure that you can hate that much of the game and still play. I mean you just listed 90+% of the game First, most of what I have listed are *optional* supplements. They are not necessary for the game. Second, I think many of underlying mechanical changes in the core rules are an improvement over previous editions and are changes that I asked for in my answer to the pre 3e questionaire. Third, the designers don't think everything is perfect with the rules. The designers have stated that there are balance problems with classes and spells as well as other issues. Monte and Sean have also stated that, if given, the chance, they would, in hindsight, go back change certain things. Most recently, Jesse Decker just stated that there are things that he does not like. If the designers are not convinced that everything is perfect why should I be convinced? Here's a hint: If this site is your only source for DND trying going to the websites of various designers (current and former), you would be very surprised at some their house rules. Fourth, just because WOTC puts something down on paper does not mean it is appropriate for everyone or that it is best way to do something. I come from pre 3.x where DMs were encouraged to change things to fit their campaigns or sensabilities. In searching for ideas I don't limit myself to WOTC. I look to previous editions of the game and other games for ideas to adapt. I also look to message boards (here and ENWorld) and third party publishers (including former and current WOTC designers) where I often find material either more to my liking or more appropriate for my campaign. This does not mean that I dislike every WOTC supplement. I love Unearthed Arcana particularly the class variants, specialist variant abilities and action points (I would have loved the alternate rules for WP/VP, class defense bonus, and armor as dr if the sections had been lengthened to incorporate all the necessary changes to spells, creatures, and sneak attack to make them work). I also like Stormwrack, Dragonomicon, the Spell Compenedium and to a lesser degree Sandstorm. I can even find enough worth while material in BoVD and Complete Warrior.
Darkuwa 12-17-05, 11:52 PM	Yah, those are all true points, but I would never play in a game with half the rules you listed here and in the sticky. You have every right to make those changes in your game, as long of your players are told beforehand and are given the choice to either vote the changes down or leave the game with no hard fealings. anyways 89: every character in the party having a level of cleric.
Greg_K 12-18-05, 12:19 AM	You have every right to make those changes in your game, as long of your players are told beforehand and are given the choice to either vote the changes down or leave the game with no hard fealings. Players cannot vote down the changes, but they do have the right to vote with their feet with no hard feelings. To date there have been no complaints other than the players wanting me to run more frequent and longer sessions . The players understand that I have a world with definite cultures that attempts to capture a different feel from that encouraged by 3.x RAW . More importantly they know me and trust me to run a good campaign.
Darkuwa 12-18-05, 12:22 AM	So if your group came to you and said they wanted a game that goes by the normal rules you would say no? Then your a dictator and Bush will be at your house tommorow to arrest you.
WolfHati 12-18-05, 03:31 AM	90. negativity
zenlike 12-18-05, 03:57 AM	So if your group came to you and said they wanted a game that goes by the normal rules you would say no? Then your a dictator and Bush will be at your house tommorow to arrest you. That sucks. You're going to be arrested by a lame 90's rock band. Maybe Gwen will come along.
Fox Lee 12-18-05, 04:30 AM	I'm trying to choose one, but I can't choose between: 91. People who think that having a mechanically sound character precludes having an interesting, deep, well-thought-out character, and vice-versa. Accordingly, this includes people who think that mechanically handicapping their character makes them a good roleplayer ("Well, yes, he's a veteran battle commander with many great victories under his belt - but using a build that's great in combat would be powergaming!"). and 92. People who are big freaking crybabies about the existence of in-character relationships (straight, gay or otherwise) - you want what you want out of the game, others want what they want. This does not include people who are fine with in-character relationships, but just don't want to have to watch anything explicit.
Koga:The ninja trick 12-18-05, 12:30 PM	93. Complicated storylines. (This is why The Koga doesn't like Forgotten Realms.) a plothook is nesscarey, but it shouldn't be drawnout and boring. The Koga litteraly slept through Lord of The Rings cause there wasn't enough action. Less Lord of the Rings, more Kobolds Ate My Baby! 94. When DMs are too hard on the paladin. 95. When DMs aren't hard enough on the paladin. 96. Players that are not girls. (Though The Koga tolerates them as long as they're not spellcasters.) 97. That one bastard who gets mad-lucky rolls and The Koga has to fudge his own just to be near equal. 98. That one bleeding heart PC that wants us to sympathize, stradegize, and well, he/she ends up dieing.. 99. Parents and thier children playing in the same game. Very uncomfertable. Especialy when The Koga wants to get his groove on some girl who's dad is right there. 100. PCs of the same class, though again, tolerable if they're not spellcasters. And 101. Prestige classes. If flavour means that much to you, multiclass, atleast then you take exp penalty for your munchkinizing..
Greg_K 12-18-05, 12:45 PM	So if your group came to you and said they wanted a game that goes by the normal rules you would say no? Then your a dictator and Bush will be at your house tommorow to arrest you. Lol. I thought it would be WOTC's infamous "DND police" that they acquired from TSR and show up at the door of those not playing by the RAW. Now as for normal rules, normal rules means core only. No supplements or optional rules such as PrC's (they are optional and at DM discretion- it says so in the DMG). And yes, I would still say no, because I would still make changes to the cleric and the druid, I would still grant the extra abilities to the sorceror, and I would also still remove some spells (just not as many). Therefore, I would not be playing core rules. Now reasons for my house rules Fewer absolutes (http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/variantfewerabsolutes1.html): See Sean Reynold's argument at his site. It is two parts and I have given you the link to the first part. Poison as Spell Designator (http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/poisondesignator.html): See Sean's reasoning again at his site Action Points (UA): Offers the player's protection for untimely bad rolls from the flat spread resulting from the d20. Weapon Groups (UA): a nod to 2e, but also the 1e Barbarian and Ranger Equipment: no spiked chains, orgoshes, gnomish pick hammers, halfling riding dogs, alchemical equipment etc. is purely flavor and an attempt to keep the feel of previous editions. Spell Changes: Magic Missile would have been officially changed to second level except for tradition so I moved it to where it should have been moved to. Divine Power and Righteous Might were removed because they make the cleric a better warrior than the fighter while cleric is buffed, plus not the flavor I want for the campaign. Other spells that I removed are purely campaign flavor UA class variants: Introduces more archetypes and makes it easier to tailor certain concepts without having to rely as much on multiclassing or PRC. As for changes to the classes: Barbarian: They have to have a culture and weapon groups is a nod to the 1e barbarian which by the way did not have rage. The 1e barbarian's culture gave it extra skills and determined the weapons available. Bard: The reduction of spells is a nod to the revised bard that appeared in Dragon and made the 1e Bard playable at first level and kept the class to a celtic feel. Cleric: Primarily a nod to the 2e specialty priests which I think were better than the 3.X domains as priest's abilities, spell lists, proficiencies should be determined by the campaign setting's deities and the deity's spheres/domains rather than the other way around. Also, the 3.X clerics are too powerful and need some tweaking anyway. Druid: I just never liked the class. It is not a celtic druid and, unlike the Shaman from Green Ronin, it is not a generic archetype. therefore, I simply replaced the Druid with the Shaman. However, since I have a Celtic region in my setting, I also wanted something closer to the Celtic Druid and that was best done with a variant of the cloistered cleric from UA. Healer: replaced Unicorn Companion, because it doesn't fit my campaign (and from what I hear on various boards, it doesn't fit many others either). Rogue: umd removed, because you cannot trick items :P Sorceror: needs to beefed. The bonus feats starting at 5th level is from Sean Reynold's suggestion at his site (Note: the other changes were there too, but I had already seen them in several other places). Wizard: Decipher Script as skill makes sense, they are studious. The feat replacing the familiar is an option, because not all wizards have familiars. Wizard, specialist: Requiring the alternate abilites from UA is a nod to the 2e specialist modifications that appeared in several 2e products as is the inclusion of the additional 2e wizard specialists.
Koga:The ninja trick 12-18-05, 12:49 PM	You got some pretty good ideas dude, but why not just drop magick and use psionics?
Greg_K 12-18-05, 01:00 PM	You got some pretty good ideas dude, but why not just drop magick and use psionics? I do not like the Psionics classes or powers. For mental powers I prefer and use Green Ronin's Psychic Handbook. I did, however, think about using spell points. However, if I am going to begin really altering the DND magic system, I would ditch the DND magic system entirely for the skill/feat magic system in Green Ronin's True 20 (which I may do anyway for my next campaign).
The Vorpal Tribble 12-18-05, 03:15 PM	98. That one bleeding heart PC that wants us to sympathize, stradegize, and well, he/she ends up dieing.. Yeah, just gotta hate the person who thinks to themselves, 'Why are we killing goblins when all they were doing was eating breakfast' or those that say 'Here, I'll lead him into the trap, you just be waiting to spring it as Bob here hides in the trees, ready to cast a spell' instead of just screaming in blood frenzy and charging. :uh-huh:
Wildonion 12-18-05, 06:38 PM	62. Eberonn. There, The Koga said it. :P Have you played the setting? If so then there is no problem. :P
Shotgun_badger 12-18-05, 08:10 PM	96. Players that are not girls. (Though The Koga tolerates them as long as they're not spellcasters.) 100. PCs of the same class, though again, tolerable if they're not spellcasters And 101. Prestige classes. If flavour means that much to you, multiclass, atleast then you take exp penalty for your munchkinizing Koga, would you mind explaning these things? I'm sorry they just seem....off to me. Though not AS odd as 99. Parents and thier children playing in the same game. Very uncomfertable. Especialy when The Koga wants to get his groove on some girl who's dad is right there. :rolleyes:
Giant Turtle 12-19-05, 12:45 AM	I don't want Powergamers, Metagamers, Rule *****s, or Munchkins in my game, it takes out so much fun everytime, and there always seems to be one of these people in my game.
simon_tage 12-19-05, 07:48 AM	102. Monte Cook (yes, I know he had a bit to do with the core rules set and I have forgiven WoTC for that) and 99.99% of Third party products, no wait, make that 100%.
taltamir 12-19-05, 09:01 AM	103. DMs who discourage roleplaying and then whine about the lack of roleplaying... 104. DMs who make railroading campaigns and then complain their PCs never take control of the situation... 105. How 90% of people think that anyone using a wish should be instantly and irrevocably destroyed no matter what he asks for.
UndeadMouse 12-19-05, 11:04 AM	106: people who bought the books years ago and just opened them 107: people who power-game stupidly 108: people who forget thier dice 109: people who can't spell their character's name 110: people who can pronounce svirfneblin and rub it in my face 111: Drizzt Do'Urden fanboys
Rhomphaia 12-19-05, 12:03 PM	Lol. I thought it would be WOTC's infamous "DND police" that they acquired from TSR and show up at the door of those not playing by the RAW. Now as for normal rules, normal rules means core only. No supplements or optional rules such as PrC's (they are optional and at DM discretion- it says so in the DMG). And yes, I would still say no, because I would still make changes to the cleric and the druid, I would still grant the extra abilities to the sorceror, and I would also still remove some spells (just not as many). Therefore, I would not be playing core rules. Now reasons for my house rules Fewer absolutes (http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/variantfewerabsolutes1.html): See Sean Reynold's argument at his site. It is two parts and I have given you the link to the first part. Poison as Spell Designator (http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/poisondesignator.html): See Sean's reasoning again at his site Action Points (UA): Offers the player's protection for untimely bad rolls from the flat spread resulting from the d20. Weapon Groups (UA): a nod to 2e, but also the 1e Barbarian and Ranger Equipment: no spiked chains, orgoshes, gnomish pick hammers, halfling riding dogs, alchemical equipment etc. is purely flavor and an attempt to keep the feel of previous editions. Spell Changes: Magic Missile would have been officially changed to second level except for tradition so I moved it to where it should have been moved to. Divine Power and Righteous Might were removed because they make the cleric a better warrior than the fighter while cleric is buffed, plus not the flavor I want for the campaign. Other spells that I removed are purely campaign flavor UA class variants: Introduces more archetypes and makes it easier to tailor certain concepts without having to rely as much on multiclassing or PRC. As for changes to the classes: Barbarian: They have to have a culture and weapon groups is a nod to the 1e barbarian which by the way did not have rage. The 1e barbarian's culture gave it extra skills and determined the weapons available. Bard: The reduction of spells is a nod to the revised bard that appeared in Dragon and made the 1e Bard playable at first level and kept the class to a celtic feel. Cleric: Primarily a nod to the 2e specialty priests which I think were better than the 3.X domains as priest's abilities, spell lists, proficiencies should be determined by the campaign setting's deities and the deity's spheres/domains rather than the other way around. Also, the 3.X clerics are too powerful and need some tweaking anyway. Druid: I just never liked the class. It is not a celtic druid and, unlike the Shaman from Green Ronin, it is not a generic archetype. therefore, I simply replaced the Druid with the Shaman. However, since I have a Celtic region in my setting, I also wanted something closer to the Celtic Druid and that was best done with a variant of the cloistered cleric from UA. Healer: replaced Unicorn Companion, because it doesn't fit my campaign (and from what I hear on various boards, it doesn't fit many others either). Rogue: umd removed, because you cannot trick items :P Sorceror: needs to beefed. The bonus feats starting at 5th level is from Sean Reynold's suggestion at his site (Note: the other changes were there too, but I had already seen them in several other places). Wizard: Decipher Script as skill makes sense, they are studious. The feat replacing the familiar is an option, because not all wizards have familiars. Wizard, specialist: Requiring the alternate abilites from UA is a nod to the 2e specialist modifications that appeared in several 2e products as is the inclusion of the additional 2e wizard specialists. Two suggestions. Go play 1e or 2e. and Stop trying to hijack the thread.
Greg_K 12-19-05, 03:03 PM	Two suggestions. Go play 1e or 2e. and Stop trying to hijack the thread. Yeah, you really added to the thread. As for hijacking, One you don't own the thread. Second, I actually replied to the topic of what I don't want and then responded to someone basically questioning my decision to making changes! If you have a problem with that, it your problem- deal with it.
Fox Lee 12-19-05, 06:29 PM	Okay then: 112: People who, for some unknown reason, insist on playing 3.xE when they clearly want to play 1.x/2.xE. Since we're all being so opinionated, I think First and Second Editions were piles of ungodly crap, and I'm sick of people trying to mangle the fine game that is 3.5E (or 3.0, but slightly less so) into earlier editions on the grounds that it's somehow better*. AFAIC, WotC has done nothing but improve, by immeasurable distance, upon 2nd Ed. I'm not interested in arguing that here - let's leave the thread to be what it was supposed to be - but since everybody is mouthing off about it, I felt the need to put in my 2CP. Oh, and: 113: Effing gender-based PrCs. I love PrCs, but the ones that have gender restrictions (as if that's a valid mechanically-limiting factor!) just **** me off - and while we get around that by just ignoring the gender limitation, they still anger me on principle. And that goes for unicorns, too - that's the real reaosn I love the Healer, even thought it's a ****-weak class. Unicorns for male character, yaws! (*Don't get me wrong, I'm all in for UnArc, and as many variants as can be crammed into the setting - but that's because I'm of the opinion that mechanics should provide enough options for a character to be whatever the player conceives, and if the original thematics don't work, they should just be changed.)
Cennedi 12-19-05, 07:32 PM	114. Eberron, really do not like the setting. It feels like it was created by someone that thinks all DnD players play DnD while base jumping off a bridge as they down a 2liter of mountain dew with blaring slip knot blaring in the background. Seriously Greyhawk is the best setting ever. the rest are nothing more than weaksauce copies. 115. 3.x over reliance on rules mechanics for everything in the game. makes me miss 1e and 2e where the gameplay was much more open and powered more by the imagination instead of a group of charts. 116. People who think their setting preference or rules edition is better than anyone elses.
Arrowhen 12-19-05, 08:10 PM	115. Airships.
Greg_K 12-19-05, 08:23 PM	Okay then: 112: Since we're all being so opinionated, I think First and Second Editions were piles of ungodly crap,) and, in term of the general underlying core mechanics which were not unified, I agree The underlying core mechanics, skill system and feats of 3.X are a vast improvement improvement over prior editions.
SnakePlisken 12-20-05, 02:35 AM	116: ppl who fall asleep during game play. THAT JUST MAKES ME WANT TO SPRAY SHAVEING CREAM DOWN THERE SHIRT MWHAHAHAHAHA!!!! a friend and i joined this group and the first time we played with them like half the ppl fell asleep. im like WTF this is bullsh*t.(didnt play with them agen btw)
taltamir 12-20-05, 03:41 AM	117. people who mispell or incorrectly use "they're" (they are), "their" (that thing which belongs to them), and "there" (it is over there). (btw, there are NO other there's, things like the're are not real words)
simon_tage 12-20-05, 07:34 AM	118. Characters based off of anime, movies or popular literature.
babysamurai 12-20-05, 08:36 AM	119. People who over-use the word "broken" (probably from playing too much MtG).
taltamir 12-20-05, 08:36 AM	118. Characters based off of anime, movies or popular literature. seconded. at the very least make an in game representation of yourself as you would want to be rather then a character from your favorite series... that is just so unimagineative 119. People who over-use the word "broken" (probably from playing too much MtG). 120. People who think that just because something is in the RAW it is fair and balanced. (but I do agree about the term broken, really annoying term. I prefer unbalanced)
Gnomish Zombie 12-20-05, 08:47 AM	121 People who don't adapt to their group, whilst obstinetly refusing to admit to themselves that they might have some flaws to work on, even though they are new 122 Newbies who think they know more than you do, because they've memorized more books/done more twinking than you. And still the only time they get to be useful, it's invariably in a way that infuriates the DM.
SnakePlisken 12-20-05, 06:02 PM	118. Characters based off of anime, movies or popular literature. hmm, maybe a hit on my name? hehe well i thought this name up befor i even knew of the movie that most ppl say i got it from :cool: 123: players whe bi*ch about haveing crappy weps when they are only about 20 mins into the start of the adventure and havent even left the first town yet.( i was the DM and the DM of the last game i played was the one bi*ching)
Xill-Lord Psionic Might 12-20-05, 07:18 PM	125. Grayhawk, EBBERON!!!, Ravenloft 126. halflings, they have no personallity, ever since seconf ed. the have been short humans not hobbits, go with kender so much cooler 127. Law vrs. Chaos debate, good v. evil is the way to go 128. low magic/carbon copies of history settings, its freggin fantasy 129. the core cosmology and deities i HATE the great wheel, dragonlance and FR dieties blow greyhawk gods out of the water pretty much i like almost everything wizards put out, just wish dark sun would come back
Big_Fau 12-21-05, 04:38 AM	130:Drizzt Do' Urden 131: A Drizzt Do' Urden wannabe 132: A two year oldwhotakes the dice and tries eat them causeing many problems at once, thechiefofwhich being its your D20 andyoudont have togo lookingina diaper for it tommorow. 133: An Entropic half-fey Tiefling Sorceror/Warlock Gestalt (never tell your players they can be w/e they want.)
The Grig Fiddler 12-21-05, 05:57 AM	Things I dont want in a game. Gr@g K.
Ralphius_Maximus 12-21-05, 07:35 AM	134: Uncalled-for GM stomps.
killcode 12-21-05, 08:12 AM	135: People who do not like games without magic. I have to say it, although I do prefer magic oriented games my-self, sometimes a new kind of game from time to time is alright. Although, do not get me wrong, magic is the way to go. Another thing, I am going to start talking like The Koga. The Code shouldn't be left out on this fun. The Code is happy now, since he has infact experianced refering to himself as, The Code.
tedopon 12-21-05, 01:53 PM	136: When a character dies in game, and the GM thinks up some idiotic reason that it didn't happen. Dying is part of life, and no matter how much you like a character, it's a game. Making new personalities is fun, you whiny losers.
Greg_K 12-21-05, 01:58 PM	Things I dont want in a game. Gr@g K. that is okay, I wouldn't want you in mine. And, if you were someone allowed into the group on a trial basis, my players would kick at before I did :eek:
Reinforcements 12-21-05, 02:07 PM	137. Powergamers, who refuse to role-play and only care about how good their characters' numbers are. 138. Role-playing elitists, who would rather do nothing but talk for hours and think that anyone who cares about numbers and dice-rolling even a little is a bad person. 139. Characters who are weird for the sake of being weird, or filled with angst. 140. Dragonlance
lord_blackfang 12-21-05, 02:16 PM	141. Players (and especially DMs) who "can't make it" to pretty much every session :mad:
ajs 12-21-05, 05:02 PM	125. Grayhawk, EBBERON!!!, Ravenloft This is where you should have clued in that this poster didn't understand the concept of a role playing game. For the record, a great game can be run in a setting based on the Smurfs TV show, the latest Anne Rice novel (perhaps those two are the same), or something you scawled on the back of a napkin. Quality games follow from quality story and quality players. The setting is only interesting in so far as it gives a good DM enough yarn with which to knit the plot, and every official D&D setting to date has done that. 126. halflings, they have no personallity, ever since seconf ed. the have been short humans not hobbits, go with kender so much cooler If you can't run a Greyhawk halfling with at least as much character today as you claim they had when they were "hobbits" back in first edition, then there's something deeply wrong with the way you view core material. 127. Law vrs. Chaos debate, good v. evil is the way to go Debate? There's no debate. "v." and "vrs." are both wrong. "vs." is correct. ;) 128. low magic/carbon copies of history settings, its freggin fantasy You are confusing fantasy with so-called "high fantasy" or "swords and sorcery". D&D has classically been both low and high magic, depending on how you view those two. For example, in Greyhawk there is a deity running a country; a group of mages who meddle in nearly everything; and many other "high magic" elements, but it's considered a "low magic" setting because the average pesant doesn't have access to magic. As for settings with little or no magic available to players... well that's not D&D (or at least it's a wildly different variant), and while I've seen that work quite well, it's not on-topic here. 129. the core cosmology and deities i HATE the great wheel, dragonlance and FR dieties blow greyhawk gods out of the water I'm not sure how a deity goes about blowing another deity out of the water unless they're both maritime combat patrons, but here's another example of where you are overly limiting yourself. You have an infinite number of infinite planes in the core cosmology (merely dozens if you ignore the Material and Abyss, which have infinite layers/versions). You can build on that however you like. To start, you have core deities like Boccob, Vecna, Pelor, Hextor, etc., but if they're not to your taste, you can easily introduce your own minor pantheons (and many have... take a look at the Age of Worms adventure path which introduced a new demigod just this year). Also keep in mind that the core gods are a small slice of what Greyhawk (from which they were taken) offers. Even the LGG which lists far more deities than the core rules is only an overview of the most influential. How can somethign so utterly open-ended be good or bad? It's practically a blank slate. pretty much i like almost everything wizards put out, just wish dark sun would come back How can you like everything wizards puts out when you dislike the core campaign setting, one of the two primary campaign settings (Eberron), the original campaign setting on which core is loosely based (Greyhawk) one of the core races (Halflings), half of the alignment system, and the way around half of the people running D&D games approach magic distribution?! It sounds to me as if you like almost everything Wizards puts out that you like ;) FWIW, here's my list of what you don't want: A DM or players who can't/won't role play A DM who fails to prepare AND can't improvise (either can work well) Real world politics Meta-game arguments Sex (almost always, though some DMs/players can do it well.. more power to them) Players or DMs who don't understand that it's not a zero-sum game
killcode 12-21-05, 05:17 PM	If I remember correctly, which I usually do, there is a place in the DMHB about making stories in the future, modern today, etc... It even had an example of weapons such as laser pistols, etc... D&D isn't just about dungeons and dragons, it is about the interaction of real human players trying to escape the world that they are in and create a completely different world, with adventure and whatever you can imagine. You have to have imagination to play D&D, or what is the point? I mean, there is a limit to the story, but the imagination to make your life completely different and exotic from how it is now is what you are trying to do. Become someone that you probably will never become. A theiving thug, a brave knight, a space bounty hunter, a WWII soldier, a Civil War Sergeant, a purple skinned half-orc/half-drawf sorcerer with three eyes(I was pushing it there).
Fox Lee 12-21-05, 06:50 PM	137. Powergamers, who refuse to role-play and only care about how good their characters' numbers are. 138. Role-playing elitists, who would rather do nothing but talk for hours and think that anyone who cares about numbers and dice-rolling even a little is a bad person. 139. Characters who are weird for the sake of being weird, or filled with angst. :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
UltimateReality 12-21-05, 07:12 PM	TravisWhoa. Spooky. You've had him too, eh? 96. Players that are not girls.More girls is good. Eberron [....] feels like it was created by someone that thinks all DnD players play DnD while base jumping off a bridge as they down a 2liter of mountain dew with blaring slip knot blaring in the background.That...is just a weird mental image. And I could see some people thinking of it as a compliment. My contribution: 142. players who think "we're playing Forgotten Realms" automatically means "AWESOME MUNCHKIN PWNZ0RZ OF D000M TYM3!!!!!!!11111~~~1`1eleventyblahblah".
Herald@Large 12-21-05, 07:36 PM	143. Whiners. 144. Cellphones. 145. Players who can't/won't learn the rules ("What do I roll to see if I hit?", after playing once a week for 3-4 months) :banghead: 146. Players who eat everything in sight but never contribute to the munchie pool. 147. Players who insist on "winning". 148. Players who aren't happy unless their character is the center of attention. 149. Players who interrupt an NPC in mid-speech with the words "I kill him/her." 150. Legolas wannabes. 151. ****-retentive rules lawyers -- either players or DMs. 152. Chaotic Stupid.
Gagnrath 12-21-05, 08:15 PM	153. Dm knowledge used against the characters constantly...... 154. Enemies that instantly and telepathicaly know the pc's are coming and are never caught unaware..... ever. 155. Breaking your own rules whenever you want to but never allowing any exceptions for players 156. Declaring inmpossible hits or damage because you are mad at a player... (so he rolled well on the turn undead and popped yourr vampire bad guy instantly you'd been rolling the lackey's rolls in front of us all night and you rolled infront of us on this occasion if a 7 missed my 24 ac last lime trust me they missed the 28 of the paladin oh and as a side note theres now way that the icy shortbow +3 (with composite +well none of us are strong enough to have found the limits yet) did 29 damage without critting even if it is composite unless it was laying the rest of us out all the time two oh and isn't it odd that you took him down to exactly -10 with your damage.) 157. Strickly enforcing character conversation in game withf ree actions less than 10 words but the bad guys under your control have the feat of evil freeaction monoluege. 158. Stealing from the other players (not the characters the players) 159. Players who constantly ignore any type of plot hook to run rampages on npc's. 160. Players who try to make the game unfun for the other players. 161. Players who try to beat non-confrontational DM's 162. PLayers who beg. Characters who beg are fine but players is bad. (ok alot of mine come from sharing a gaming group/dming duties. our other main DM has good stories but is poor at presenting his plot hooks and the actual mechanics of playing his monsters. Not everything fights to the death. and occasionally one of your beloved big evil things can be defeated and not brought back to life..... he's also a pain as a player but for the most part when its my turn I spend the first 2 sessions unlearning the players everything they learned to cope with him. the other players are only willing to DM oneshot adventures and I'm not willing to DM all the time.)
slimgoodbody 12-21-05, 08:28 PM	163: Greg_K 164: The Koga 165: The entire school of thought to which they subscribe.
Ralphius_Maximus 12-22-05, 07:49 AM	166. GM's who are too wrapped up in their own cleverness (ie, a plot which can't end unless seven differend and unrelated events all occur on the same day)
Gadodel 12-22-05, 10:30 PM	Wow...I forgot about this thread....
zenlike 12-23-05, 01:28 AM	167. tweakers ;)
taltamir 12-23-05, 04:29 AM	149. Players who interrupt an NPC in mid-speech with the words "I kill him/her." - This reminds me the time I played a campaign where the orc cheiften kidnapped the town babies, he was holding one up and giving a speach about how our only options are to fight him where he kills them all on the spot, or agree to take half of them back and let him cook the other half... I interrupted him with I kill him. Or more specifically, I cast stilled silenced true strike and shoot to kill. I then rolled a 20, and did 17 damage. Unfortunately, he had 18 HP and that wasn't good enough to count as death from massive damage, so he killed all the babies on the spot and fought us... I was quite dissatisfied with that DM. There are plenty of reasons to distrupt a BBEG speach with "I kill him"
Herald@Large 12-23-05, 01:37 PM	- There are plenty of reasons to distrupt a BBEG speach with "I kill him" I was referring more to the one-track-mind type of player who says that to or about *all* NPCs. Even friendly ones. Even the one who's offering to heal them for *free*.
taltamir 12-24-05, 09:13 AM	I was referring more to the one-track-mind type of player who says that to or about *all* NPCs. Even friendly ones. Even the one who's offering to heal them for *free*. Oh, I KNOW that one... :) DM: The celestial diva is the most beutiful woman you have ever saw, she opens her mouth and her beutiful meloudeous voice sings in your ears: "You have done well adventurers, your defeat of the evil dragon lich vampire treeant XyyzzothXuux will save the... PC: I KILL HER! DM: Bu,.. but~! PC: I rollled a 17 on my initiative and have a +6 bonus, a celestial diva has a +1 bonus so that means I have to win... I go first right? I cast finger of death on her now... DC 20 or die! DM: [Picks up his DMG and bookslaps the bugger]
Drone23 12-24-05, 02:07 PM	168. Players who give out unsolicited advice to the other players to either a) direct them during combat or b) have them take feats, skills, classes, or spells to buff their character.
Zevox 12-24-05, 02:10 PM	142. players who think "we're playing Forgotten Realms" automatically means "AWESOME MUNCHKIN PWNZ0RZ OF D000M TYM3!!!!!!!11111~~~1`1eleventyblahblah". Seconded, though fortunately I've not had to deal with any of those (yet). 169. Players who think the DM won't let them die (often due to playing one too many video games). 170. Players who think the whole game is a contest between the DM and them to see if the DM can kill them or not. 171. Players who always play atheists (sometimes Athars) in the Realms then have them select a patron deity at the moment of thier deaths to avoid being condemned to the Wall of the Faithless (abusing the clause about this in the FRCS). This I've had to deal with :rolleyes: . 172. Guns & technology (only alteration I make to the Realms in my games is removing Lantan and altering Gond's church, precisely to avoid this). 173. Cross-world creatures/classes/PrCs (I don't care how much you like them, I'm not letting you play a Kender in Eberron, a Purple Dragon Knight in Dragonlance, or a Warforged in the Realms). 174. DMs that go out of thier way to make sure the party Paladin falls. 175. Players who insist on playing a Paladin but can't manage to play anything but the "holier-than-thou" Paladin. 176. Players who think that playing in the Realms means they're automatically going to become a Chosen of thier patron deity. Zevox
ChaotikLawful 12-24-05, 03:12 PM	177: Characters based on anime. 178: Characters that are emos and played by such. 179: Characters that are lesbian, especially when played by males.
Chipper173 12-24-05, 05:13 PM	176. Players who think that playing in the Realms means they're automatically going to become a Chosen of thier patron deity. Hey, it happened to me. :)
Raven Dark 12-24-05, 05:43 PM	One 'thing' per post... I'll start: 1. NPC's that don't follow the RAW. 180. Blue Mages. (or mages of any color, really)
ressurrector 12-24-05, 05:53 PM	181: DMs who don't understand the magic system, at all.... Quote: DC 26 save?!?! What kind of spell/human cleric is that!
ressurrector 12-24-05, 06:23 PM	182: DMs with NPCs so freaking powerfull, you start to wonder why they need you?
ressurrector 12-24-05, 06:27 PM	183: DMs who reject things without even looking at them. look, it's a game, it's supposed to be fun. look, it's all made up, and what's the point if magic if you can't use it to explain outlandish but fun things like a blood magus, or an elemental savant. There's nothing wrong with splat-books if the DM takes a look at them ahead of time, possibly altering them so they fit better. I don't want to play with a DM that uses Core only, and refuses everything else, *I cast a spell/I attack* gets old after a while.
taltamir 12-26-05, 12:40 PM	184. Clerics, aka Gods in training, because for SOME reason noone wants to play them. (I'll give you a hint why... noone wants to be a munchikin! The only clerics I have seen my last few games were half orcs clerics of war with an int score of 8, not that the "balanced" cleric is any better) 185. Sorcerers, where there is no corrolation between the class's purpose and flavor and how its implemented. In otherwords, metagaming galore. 186. Paladins, who should be lawful evil by their actions, not lawful good. (lets murder everything and ask questions never)
Arrowhen 12-26-05, 01:24 PM	I don't want to play with a DM that uses Core only, and refuses everything else, *I cast a spell/I attack* gets old after a while. But *I cast a new overpowered spell/I attack using a new overpowered feat* is somehow more fun? The vast majority of the rules, whether in the core books or in the suppliments, are concerned with casting spells/fighting--because that's what you need rules for the most. There's plenty of other stuff to do in D&D, but it's magic and combat which require the most mechanics. If your DM isn't satisfying your non-combat needs, no amount of supplimental material is going to improve the situation.
Garble Willowwits 12-26-05, 03:57 PM	187. DM who doesn't understand how skills work and treats them like feats, or just decides that the d100 will settle everything. 188. DM who decides that if you roll a certain number on a d100, your PC can be a giant robot that shoots lasers and rocket. Or Iceman.
CTHUHLU_THE_GROOVY 12-26-05, 05:05 PM	189. Pcs who forget important details about their character. ( I worship Vecna right?) ( I'm a cleric right? 190. Players who want to break after every encounter.
DerHauptman 12-26-05, 06:48 PM	191. Players who refuse to do anything outside of game. i.e. show up "Hang on I need to jack with my sheet for 15 min b4 I'm ready".
DerHauptman 12-26-05, 06:55 PM	192. A stingy DM. there are soo many neat magic items out there and you play and play and never get anything casue he wants to keep the game simpler. Ugh! That and by level 12 and at 35% of character wealth calculations you get your butt's whiped in every encounter. Managing to survive by favorable fudging only on the DM part.
DerHauptman 12-26-05, 07:01 PM	193. Playing in a game that has a favorite PC. This is ok if the plot needs to be advanced but geez is it annoying if you get glossed over again and again so the favored elf-ranger/best friend of DM gets a great plot line. Especially, after you wrtie a 3 page back story so there are hooks and such. In the next game, I simply woke up on the street with amnesia. Oh...and when you are a smart arse in subsequent character creation to make a point and it goes right over the DM's head - lol.
Jodjod 12-26-05, 07:09 PM	194. (speaking as a online gamer through circumstance): Games where the DM/other PC's just disappear periodically, only to come back with some vague excuse about "RL".
taltamir 12-26-05, 08:54 PM	195. PCs without any backstory whatsoever.
SnakePlisken 12-27-05, 12:21 AM	[QUOTE=Herald@Large] 149. Players who interrupt an NPC in mid-speech with the words "I kill him/her." QUOTE] LOL i am reminded of an adventure i was the Dm of. i sent an messanger of the fearie queen to my players and when the fearie entered there house the rouge sneeked up behind her, in the middle of her saying "im here to help you", he attacked rolling a 20 and doing max damage for 48 dmg (with sneak attack 2D6) killing that damn thing utterly. was kinda funny at the time,specialy for me cuz it fuxerd them later in the game.
The Grig Fiddler 12-27-05, 02:35 AM	5 drow in a group of 6 players.
Shatteredtower 12-27-05, 03:06 AM	Let me simplify: 197) People, inspirations, ideas, books, and rules. Get rid of all of these and my life as a DM is so much easier.
Elven Doritos 12-27-05, 03:51 AM	Let me simplify: 197) People, inspirations, ideas, books, and rules. Get rid of all of these and my life as a DM is so much easier. You forgot dice. :P
Shatteredtower 12-27-05, 05:26 AM	The dice that can be explained are not the dice. :P
taltamir 12-27-05, 09:37 AM	5 drow in a group of 6 players. 5 duel scimatar weilding drow from menzobrosen with a wonderous tiger figurine and the name drizzle you mean...
HorgeshII 12-27-05, 05:54 PM	198) Gms who see the Wish spell as nothing more than a means to screw the party, regardless of how banal, harmless, and/or logical the wish may be. 199) Players who refuse to learn how to build mechanically sound characters and instead take feats/classes because they "sound cool." While they might make for interesting roleplay, such characters tend to be dead weight in combat.
DisposableHero_ 12-27-05, 06:04 PM	199) Players who refuse to learn how to build mechanically sound characters and instead take feats/classes because they "sound cool." While they might make for interesting roleplay, such characters tend to be dead weight in combat.I think more accurate would be to say a mixture of players who do build mechanically sound characters and players who don't. As long as everyone is playing in the same league, there shouldn't be much of a problem, the DM can adjust the difficulty of the game to accomodate a weaker set of characters pretty easily, and the trouble arises when some characters are precisely built and considered characters made with the intent of being powerful (while still reaonable) and the remainder are a collection of non-synergistic abilities that sounded cool. I forget who this quote should be attributed to but: "savvy character creation and an interesting and creative character are not mutually exclusive, and one should never hold the other hostage."
ressurrector 12-27-05, 06:16 PM	200) players who give no thought at all to backstory, motivation, any type of RPing; they just want to build the most powerfull character the DM will allow, and leave the rest of the group in the dust.
ressurrector 12-27-05, 06:18 PM	201) players who roll to bluff you, succeed, then tell you (OoC) what you just missed.....makes RPing the situation really hard.
ressurrector 12-27-05, 06:19 PM	202) DMs who use the players diplomacy/charisma, instead of the characters. *nerf the party face, shall we?*
Reinforcements 12-28-05, 02:31 AM	198) Gms who see the Wish spell as nothing more than a means to screw the party, regardless of how banal, harmless, and/or logical the wish may be. I hear that. It's actually a pet peeve of mine, although I suppose it doesn't come up too often.
Always-Late 12-28-05, 02:51 AM	By the time we reach 1001, there'll be so many contradictions the conclusion will have to be that nobody wants anything in their game.
Thurbane 12-28-05, 05:13 AM	199) Players who refuse to learn how to build mechanically sound characters and instead take feats/classes because they "sound cool." While they might make for interesting roleplay, such characters tend to be dead weight in combat. 203) Players who build either totally ridiculous race/class/feat combinations to get the most powerful character possible, or in a simialr vein create carbon copy characters EVERY TIME they create a new character, because they have discovered the "ultimate combination"... Honestly, this falls back to the whole roleplay vs. rollplay debate. Any character can be a unique roleplaying experience - you don't need to be the mechanically perfect warrior or spellcaster to enjoy the game, or to be a valuable party member. Clever roleplay and intelligent utilization of what you have (even if you're not the "bestest with the mostest") can be worth a lot more than a huge BAB or the ability to cast spells that can vaporize a dragon at one hundred paces...
Ralphius_Maximus 12-28-05, 07:18 AM	203) Players who build either totally ridiculous race/class/feat combinations to get the most powerful character possible, or in a simialr vein create carbon copy characters EVERY TIME they create a new character, because they have discovered the "ultimate combination"... Honestly, this falls back to the whole roleplay vs. rollplay debate. Any character can be a unique roleplaying experience - you don't need to be the mechanically perfect warrior or spellcaster to enjoy the game, or to be a valuable party member. Clever roleplay and intelligent utilization of what you have (even if you're not the "bestest with the mostest") can be worth a lot more than a huge BAB or the ability to cast spells that can vaporize a dragon at one hundred paces... The problem with "mechanically sound" characters is that they must have knowledge of the game mechainics in character to make that degree of planning work. Ask a PC why they are learning a particular ability and they answer "so that in three levels I can take X ability for which this is a prerequisite, which will then allow me to multiclass into the following..." Which doesn't make a lot of sense from a characterisation perspective. Of course, the other side of that is that if they aren't thought out at all they wind up, as has been suggested, pretty useless. Anyway. 204. The shy player who has to be prompted to take part in the session and, if forgotten, will sit in a corner and do nothing for an entire encounter.
Toran_A_Sunder 12-28-05, 07:29 AM	The dice that can be explained are not the dice. :P Lao Tsu is applauding you from beyond :D
Bandit_Raist 12-28-05, 12:23 PM	205. Being evil but not really evil. Me: I use "create undead" DM: Okthat spell has an evil discription so your lawful evil now and you create a skeleton Me: Ok I tell the skeleton to save the puppy and protect all the little orphans. DM: ERROR *head explodes*
HorgeshII 12-28-05, 12:39 PM	203) Players who build either totally ridiculous race/class/feat combinations to get the most powerful character possible, or in a simialr vein create carbon copy characters EVERY TIME they create a new character, because they have discovered the "ultimate combination"... Honestly, this falls back to the whole roleplay vs. rollplay debate. Any character can be a unique roleplaying experience - you don't need to be the mechanically perfect warrior or spellcaster to enjoy the game, or to be a valuable party member. Clever roleplay and intelligent utilization of what you have (even if you're not the "bestest with the mostest") can be worth a lot more than a huge BAB or the ability to cast spells that can vaporize a dragon at one hundred paces... Mechanically sound dosen't necessarily mean min/max-uber-optimized to the point of stupidity, it just means that your character is well planned, as 3.5 characters need to be. That's really one thing that erks me about 3.5: too much planning. I pine for the simpler days of taking a character concept, a class, and running with it, unconcerned about how effective I might be at level 10 because of decisions I made at level 3. Back on track: 206) Players who take any ill befalling their character as a personal, out-of-character attack.
DangerDre 12-31-05, 06:39 PM	207) DMs that make you wait in the other room for 3 hours, while they finish with another PC.
ressurrector 12-31-05, 07:17 PM	208) improperly played paladins. 209) the slaughterizer: exists only to kill, if he sees it, he must kill it.
RedWizard 01-01-06, 12:19 AM	210) Joining a group and going through the entire session of endless monster slaying without having a clue what the goal of the adventure is and realizing that most of the players have a hard time recalling that info also. 211) Players who min/max 212) Players who do not believe there should be a real element of risk to their characters. 213) Players who take no effort trying to make a character that is consistent with the culture present in the camapaign. (ex. Arabic flavored land, player opts for a viking.) 214) Players who whine after 6th level when the mage starts stealing the spotlight from their fighter. [QUOTE=SnakePlisken]hmm, maybe a hit on my name? hehe well i thought this name up befor i even knew of the movie that most ppl say i got it from :cool: Uhhh...yeah. 215 is that guy.
Dark_beebles 01-01-06, 01:31 AM	216 my DM
taltamir 01-01-06, 11:22 AM	209) the slaughterizer: exists only to kill, if he sees it, he must kill it. EEEEIIII.... KILLIES(TM*)! Gotta catc.... erm, kill them all! *Killies is a trademark of taltamir to be used in any gamist RPG he plays in, a much more descriptive term then "Mobs".
Sharnwarrior 01-01-06, 11:54 AM	217) Dont look for nymph prostitutes. 218) Please stop reffering King Boranel as 'King Brocoli'
ConclaveKing 01-01-06, 07:42 PM	219: DMs who take advantage of noobs. 220: DMs who don't know the rules.
sooperspook 01-01-06, 08:48 PM	125. Grayhawk, EBBERON!!!, Ravenloft 220: Forgotten Realms. 221: Players who think that Forgotten Realms are the Be All, End All of D&D and constantly try to turn other settings into it. 222: Players who constantly try to build ForgottenRealms characters using Forgotten Realms specific material in settings where they make no sense.
taltamir 01-01-06, 08:48 PM	217) Dont look for nymph prostitutes. 218) Please stop reffering King Boranel as 'King Brocoli' Instead of nymph prostitutes just look for nymphes... they should always be ready for a good time :)
sooperspook 01-01-06, 08:53 PM	114. Eberron, really do not like the setting. It feels like it was created by someone that thinks all DnD players play DnD while base jumping off a bridge as they down a 2liter of mountain dew with blaring slip knot blaring in the background. Seriously Greyhawk is the best setting ever. the rest are nothing more than weaksauce copies. .... 116. People who think their setting preference or rules edition is better than anyone elses. Uhm.... :confused:
Herobane 01-02-06, 02:17 AM	i hate it how my players always make off-topic conversations that somehow always end up with someone blurting out something inappropriate involving Micheal Jackson and little boys.
Herobane 01-02-06, 02:30 AM	according to the test, im an idiot
Thurbane 01-02-06, 04:17 AM	223(?). Players who will not accept that the DMs word is final 224. DMs who are not flexible and not willing to discuss decisions with their players
NinjaE 01-02-06, 07:07 AM	227: A properly played ninja PC. I'd be completely unable to make myself kill it (though, of course, it can be argued that a properly played ninja CAN'T be killed, whether you try your best or not.).
smoker 01-02-06, 12:07 PM	228: Out of shape players. (They eat all my food!)
Prak, the Mad 01-07-06, 05:08 AM	229: DMs that make up wierd character creation rules like "you have to roll your skill points" and other controlling stuff
Prak, the Mad 01-07-06, 05:12 AM	230: DMs who assume that you know that some random city in a setting you know nothing about is a certain way, like Sharn I believe... I was playing a shifter in my first Ebberon game, having never taken much of a look at the setting, we killed something on a bridge and the city guards came towards us, so I thought "bridge, water, I'll jump off and escape the guards"... it was a bridge over a large chasm or some such... she didn't say that at the start... fortunately she stated when I brought the idea up... and the guards held me when I tried to do it anyway counting on my ref. save to allow me to grab the side... which brings me too...
Prak, the Mad 01-07-06, 05:20 AM	231: DMs who control every -censored- thing about the world, through methods such as every town guard being epic, even in hamlets... that's actually a couple DMs... one of which is the one from the previous two posts... Fell Lord, how I hated her game...
Prak, the Mad 01-07-06, 05:29 AM	64: Dm's who agree with the above notion, thankfully mine does not. BTW to whomever dissed Ninja Dwarves. A dwarf could make a wicked Ninja. A spiked chain is a perfectly acceptable weapon, give me thirty seconds to get the hang of it, stand in fron of me, and I will kick your ass... seriously, a chain makes a rather good weapon, just ask ASIA and ROME!
Prak, the Mad 01-07-06, 05:36 AM	What don't I want in my game? Munchkins Powergamers Evil PC's Spiked Chains, Orgosh's, Gnomish Pick Hammers, etc. Halfling Riding Dogs Bizarre PrCs (e.g., Acolyte of the Skin, Oozemaster, etc) 99% of WOTC prestige classes 99% of the Alchemical Items 99% of the material from the Races of (x) Books 90+% of the material from the various Class splat books Monster classes Anything from the following: Book of Exalted Deeds Epic Level Handbook Psionics Handbook (expanded or 3.0) Magic of Incarnum Weapons of Legacy You forgot Core. :rolleyes: :P seriously, geez... if you can't figure out how to make that stuff work/can't suspend your disbelief, you must be a horrible DM, why not go be part of the SCA? DnD is about Fantasy, I can see playing with just Core if one of your players is a complete Power Gamer who makes the game less fun for other players, but, I mean, you could also just say no to their characters...
green_yawgmoth 01-07-06, 05:43 AM	232: Players who tell me that everything is fine and that they're enjoying the game when I ask, but gossip and whine about my style of DMing behind my back. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/yawgmoth/kittyjig.gif
Hell_Bane 01-07-06, 01:03 PM	233. DMs who, for some reason, don't want the PCs to feel cool. There is always an NPC at least as powerful as them, no matter where they are, and it doesn't matter if the PCs gain 5 levels, because the NPCs will be 5 levels higher next time they meet them.
Koga:The ninja trick 01-07-06, 06:26 PM	#234: Players who complain about the world being too black and white. You want some cheese with that whine? If you don't like it go bother some other DM who's willing to work his ass off for you. #235: DMs who make a world all grey and heavy on the political side. These games are drawn out, boring, and more often we're left arguing both in-game then out then seeing any justice or even exp. The Koga refuses to be in a game like this. #236: Players who don't share thier gold to help another party member. As a functioning group we need to think as one, not as individuals. Such a person deserves PKing, but alot of times they aren't alone. (Ironicaly..) And #237: Done to death jokes. Let them rest in peace. Isn't necromancy ussualy [Evil] tagged?
Prak, the Mad 01-07-06, 06:57 PM	114. Eberron, really do not like the setting. It feels like it was created by someone that thinks all DnD players play DnD while base jumping off a bridge as they down a 2liter of mountain dew with blaring slip knot blaring in the background. Seriously Greyhawk is the best setting ever. the rest are nothing more than weaksauce copies. ... 116. People who think their setting preference or rules edition is better than anyone elses. am I the only one who sees a discrepancy here?
Greg K 01-07-06, 07:11 PM	seriously, geez... if you can't figure out how to make that stuff work/can't suspend your disbelief, you must be a horrible DM, why not go be part of the SCA? DnD is about Fantasy, I can see playing with just Core if one of your players is a complete Power Gamer who makes the game less fun for other players, but, I mean, you could also just say no to their characters... Its not about making that stuff work or suspending disbelief. You don't have to allow everything to have a good game. When I run a game, it is about creating interesting settings with internal logic and consistancy for the players to adventure within. If that means banning official WOTC material because a) Wizards stuff doesn't fit or contradicts the setting or b) I find a better rule in a third party product then the inappropriate WOTC material does not get used. Oh and as for my must being a bad DM, do you know what they say about assuming? My players enjoy my campaigns When my campaigns are put on hiatus so that I can take a rest from DMing and play, the players are always asking when I will be ready to run. They can't wait to resume their characters and see what is in store for them. They will drop their own games or other campaigns in which they are participating to play in my campaign. So, I will take my players view of me as a DM over your assumption.
Prak, the Mad 01-07-06, 07:50 PM	Its not about making that stuff work or suspending disbelief. You don't have to allow everything to have a good game. When I run a game, it is about creating interesting settings with internal logic and consistancy for the players to adventure within. If that means banning official WOTC material because a) Wizards stuff doesn't fit or contradicts the setting or b) I find a better rule in a third party product then the inappropriate WOTC material does not get used. Oh and as for my must being a bad DM, do you know what they say about assuming? My players enjoy my campaigns When my campaigns are put on hiatus so that I can take a rest from DMing and play, the players are always asking when I will be ready to run. They can't wait to resume their characters and see what is in store for them. They will drop their own games or other campaigns in which they are participating to play in my campaign. So, I will take my players view of me as a DM over your assumption. sorry, I now understand your reasoning, a and b make perfect sense to me, I once had to deal with a player whining about the fact that one of my worlds didn't have Orcs, but, you know what the Koga says about old jokes, let the Ass-U-Me thing die, it's stupid I just like the Spiked chain, and was mildly put off by the whole long list of things, but we'll prolly never play together so the conflict of our opinions doesn't matter, again, sorry.
Ralphius_Maximus 01-08-06, 09:48 AM	238. Sushi
Morotis 01-08-06, 10:28 AM	239: PCs who don't know the rules, have no intensions of learning the rules, and are so inept at playing thay can't even level up their own character even with the books layed out infront of them and the book open to the right page for their character... 240: Pun-Pun 241: A DM who is so empty headed he forgets the group is coming over today to play D&D so goes to a party, and when we show up at his house it's locked and the house is dark, so We all have to walk to 3+ miles home...
GnarledRoot 01-08-06, 06:31 PM	242. players who refuse to accept that alignment is an integral part of the game. :rolleyes:
Ralphius_Maximus 01-09-06, 11:07 PM	243. Paladin players who don't grasp the whole Paladin's code thing and think they can behave as a chaotic fighter with extra bits.
Ichimaru_Gin 01-10-06, 09:53 PM	244. Peoples who surabuse of terms like "broken", "flavor", "munchkins" just because they read this message board too much. In fact, I don't need people who think that WOTC Boards are the "Rules of the god". Some people in my gaming group always stress me with these things. Honestly, I read lots of what can be found here! The problem is...well... that some gamers can't have their own opinions and it make me sick... -_-.
Neodymium 01-10-06, 11:01 PM	245. luchadores scratch that. I only want luchadores.
taltamir 01-12-06, 06:06 PM	244. Peoples who surabuse of terms like "broken", "flavor", "munchkins" just because they read this message board too much. In fact, I don't need people who think that WOTC Boards are the "Rules of the god". Some people in my gaming group always stress me with these things. Honestly, I read lots of what can be found here! The problem is...well... that some gamers can't have their own opinions and it make me sick... -_-. what, you mean just because Koga and Me have been debating something its NOT been decided by the "community" who has absolute power over any DM? [/sarcasm] Yea thats a good point... I second #244
Deekin 01-12-06, 07:10 PM	246: Anything from the Forgotton Relm, b/c all my players that pull stuff from their dominate. The Relms are better off forgotton.