In my session today, we ended up just as I was transformed into an incubus as a result of 'a wish' and its side-effects. One person tried to argue that being changed physically into an incubus also should mean the mental change of alignment as well, and that, given that I am a Chaotic Neutral Paladin following 'the traveller', I should also lose EVERY SINGLE paladin ability as a result.
However, I am of the opinion that this physical change should not mean a mental change of alignment, as it has not changed the person I am. I also do not believe that it is the intention of the creators of D&D for a paladin to lose every skill and spell as a result of an alignment change, although I could be wrong as losing all abilities is the result in other games (Pathfinder)
Please could someone help me out here with some advice?
Alignment is a reflection of your actions, not a straitjacket on how you must act.If you willfully break your paladin's oath and you show no signs of repentance, the DM may say you should become another character class like fighter or take the Oathbreaker paladin class option in the DMG. Thus if you haven't actually cast aside your oath, I see no reason you should lose your paladin abilities. You are not your alignment - your alignment is a descriptor of what you genearlly have done. If you stick to being your alignment before the change to an incubus, it should change back. (I don't think it should have changed in the first place frankly.)
Whoever that one person is in your group, he or she sounds like a jerk for trying to make you lose your class features. That's between you and your DM.
yeah alignment is something I don't even use in my campaigns simply because I've had it happen where DM's and sometimes even other players (and this sounds like that kind of situation) try to force you to act the way they personally view the alignment. "You can't do that, your Chaotic Good character would never do that!" Ugh. Terrible DM'ing and attitudes. Like iserith said, alignment is NOT a straitjacket meant to stop you from playing the character how YOU want to play it. I also second the jerk statement, if that person isn't the DM tell them to knock it off. It's not cool to have someone try to take away features of your character. Tell them to look up Wheaton's Law!
The DM tends to support the guy who says this unfortunately, mainly because they've both played Pathfinder and thats the system in that, It doesn't help that the DM's guide (which contains oathbreaker paladins) isnt out yet as far as any of us know?
Was it your choice to become an incubus? If not, what your DM is doing is not ok (heck either way it's not ok). He's forcing you to change into another creature AND now because of that forced change you're going to lose features of your class? When does the punishment end exactly? When you're an NPC?
Pathfinder is a different game. How things work in Pathfinder don't apply.
Have you willfully broken your oath and not show any signs of repentance?
Noctaem - The transformation was entirely the DM's choice, my exact wording of the wish was "I wish that I could return to my native plane of existance at will". I don't mind becoming an incubus as a race, but losing my class seems a bit much?
iserith - I have not broken the oaths that I took at level 3, and up until now I have stuck to my god, what He stands for and also my own alignment
Your DM's word is final, but on page 86 of the PHB, there's a sidebar called "Breaking Your Oath" that you should point out to your DM. Since you haven't done anything voluntarily to break your oath, I see no reason you should lose your class features.
Well then explain this to your DM. It's not fair that he arbitrarily changes your race without your consent and then on top of that decides that he wants to punish you for his own decision by making you lose your class features. I mean you might as well make a new character at that point since yours no longer exists. lol.
Thanks iserith, I can see that now and will read this out to him next session, and will also let him know what has been said here!
Noctaem, thanks also! My DM has this underlying feeling going in every session like we're about to be f****d over somehow, which makes the game different. The race change I can deal with as a side-effect of a wish, that's his style. I just really didnt like the concept of losing the first class that I've enjoyed in the game, but now I know that I at least have somewhere to stand it's fine. My argument would be that polymorph doesnt change your alignment, neither should this, which I thought a reasonable argument.
polymorph says "It retains its alignment and personality."
so that seems like a good guideline.
mellored wrote:
Creature alignments are only for general reference for the use of those creatures as NPC, and should never be used as a replacement for a players chosen alignment. If anything, this should be treated as the equivalent of a True Plolymorph spell that allows you to keep your alignment and personality. Interesting side effect. I would probably just make it so you no actual control over where you land on your home plane.
They're suffering edition bias/hangover. NOWHERE in the rules does it say this, and a DM who goes along with it against your wishes is kinda being a jerk. And the player who brought this up IS DEFINITELY being a jerk.
I've never liked the idea of "Paladins and/or clerics lose all their abilities because their gods are fickle and look to jump on any attempt to make them completely ineffective, whether the act that caused this was willing or unwilling." But maybe I'm just spoiled because I believe in a kind, benevolent, forgiving God...
(seriously, though, there's no way in heck I'd play as a paladin in old editions with certain DMs. That's just waiting for a "LULZ! Gotcha! It's in the rulez!" moment)
Like already pointed out, you don't need a special alignment for any oath, even so most will come into conflict with specific one.
But I like to throw something in, that supports the alignment-change idea, even though I'd made arrangements beforehand as a DM in such a delicate case: Fiends are embodiment of certain alignments, demons don't choose their alignment, but are their alignment. If a demon/devil/inbetween gets another alignment, it ceases to be what it was. This is taken from the alignment text of the PHB and when a powerful wish makes you change you into an incubus, you'll either change your alignment to stay one or ceases to be an incubus immediatly, which would make that wish somehow void by default. Even though it's more fluff-wise, it's still important.
Normally there are some ways to handle it clever:
1.) The wish was too powerful to be permanent, so after some time you change back automatically.
2.) You have to play a while in your new alignment, but get a chance to break out at some point, ceasing being an incubus.
3.) Play like you normally do, just adjust the morals a bit. Alignment isn't a whole personality, so instead of enjoying being free, you start to ensure your freedom by slaughtering those who may endanger it.
But for paladin abilities: Vengeance is still possible with any alignment, imo.
Personally, i don't see any issue with a lawful good incubus.
Sure it might be the norm, but it's not any worse then a good drow, or an evil unicorn.
The polymorph argument is a pretty solid one that I will certainly make, thanks.
randi - The idea that the incubus' NPC alignment (NE) only being for the NPC was pointed out but not really listened to. The morphing side-effect was a surprise, especially given that I had just encountered and been charmed by an incubus. I quite liked the twist and race change until that moment when the DM fiat stated "oh yeah, now you cant use any paladin abilities lol"
Timborama - The player and the DM ended up agreeing right at the end of the session (the change happened in the last five minutes of it) and as more experienced players they ignore points I make. My god is meant to be "The Traveller - deity of chaos and change (CN)" and I don't believe that changing forms means I could no longer follow this god, especially now I am effectively change incarnate (shapechanging, plane travel etc) But I can't link or post any information straight from the bestiary to back this up :P
Also...what were the circumstances that made you poof into an Incubus with a corrupted Wish? Was it because of their Plane Shift ability? Were you in the Abyss or Nine Hells at the time?
KhronosVII wrote:
The situation was that I had been charmed during a roleplay session with the incubus, and at night it commanded me away from camp without the others noticing me, taking me into the ethereal realm. after breaking free from charmed and dealing a load of radiant damage to the incubus it fled. I had a wish saved up from a previous session and as such I wished to be able to travel back to my native plane at will, and then BAM I'm an incubus. I would agree about the power stuff but yeah.
In response to the hate my DM seems to be getting, while I'm annoyed about losing all my skills, generally he is a good DM and we all enjoy ourselves, just there are occasions where someone or everyone feels f*ck*d over somehow. For example, one party member today traded a 10,000 gold valued ruby for an enchanted maul. The player had previously asked the DM what 10k gold would get him, and the Dm said +4. Five minutes later the player is told by the DM that the maul is actually only +1, his argument being that the discussion with the shopkeeper had not been specific enough. Little things like this are beginning to build up. The peak for me was that I was told my alignment HAD to change and therefore I HAD to lose my paladin skills.
KhronosVII wrote:
KhronosVII wrote:
iserith wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Rottle wrote:
Rottle wrote:
That DM is definitely starting to sound like a right prat (total jerk) after doing that to you with the wish and then the other player with regard to the magical maul. If I had a DM that was acting that way, I would literally consider leaving their game and telling them up front why...no one needs that kind of b.s. treatment period. 
Personally, I hope you and the other player are able to get things sorted out well, but if not, perhaps you all can start your own game/campaign then. 
If dm can change your race with your wish he can make it so that the wish lets you keep your paladin abilities when changed. It's totally his choice.
Talk these issues over with your DM. Bring a printed copy of this thread for him to consider. Give him time to digest the fact that he is causing problems (I doubt you are the only one upset).
If he still does not change, then it is time to think about leaving the party and finding a new group and/or DM.
A couple points:
1) WHile an incubus born and bred in the Lower Planes is NE a polymorphed person isn't a true incubus, they only have the powers and looks of one, but otherwise keep their own personality and alignment. To fully become an incubus they'd become an NPC under the DM's control, and anyone polymorphed into a frog would be just a frog with no sentience left to speak of. You haven't fully become an incubus, you've been transformed into the body of an incubus (or sucubus should you choose to genderchange) but the change via wish wouldn't result in an alignment change any more than use of True Polymorph (as others have pointed out).
2) As pointed out by all sounds this was within the oath to your god and in 5e there is no alignment restrictions on paladins, just that they do their best to uphold their oath. This brings the paladin up to the 21st century along with the druids no longer required to be True Neutral.
3) A +4 weapon likely doesn't exist in 5e anyway. While the DMG isn't out all the material out there indicates that weapons, ammunition, and armor goes from +1 to +3 (and each plus being one rarity tier higher than the previous). So either the DM is elevating magic items beyond what's in the rulebooks, is basing them off other editions (or Pathfinder), or definitely intended to prey on the greed/lack of information about 5e magic items of the player to screw them over.
4) While the DM is free to corrupt your wish under the rules of the wish spell, the level of "corruption" he's inflicted seems out of line with the nature of the wish as you worded it. You should also check with him to make sure that the Prime Material is still considered your native plane and not one of the Lower Planes. If he says it's one of the Lower Planes now than he's definitely just trying to overwrite your character with some plot-driven NPC of his choosing because native plane should be Prime Material, as in where YOU were born not where your new form is typically from. Personally I would have made it more subtle and instead of granting the ability to move to ANY plane at will, instead would have made it that when not on the Prime Material you would be sent back there (at a random location) any time you even thought about your home or past. It'd still be at will but it'd just have a "trigger finger" response time.
I think the DM is breaking the RAW of the Wish spell: all that your wish involved was a watered-down version of a Plane Shift spell. The Wish description says if you "duplicate any other spell of 8th level or lower (Plane Shift is 7th level) ... you don't need to meet any requirements in that spell ... the spell simply takes effect." No wonder you feel screwed over.
Definitely a jerk DM. My first clue was that he has grossly mishandled the effect of a Wish spell. Wish corruption should only ever occur if (a) the granter of the wish is malicious toward you, or (b) the wish is worded extremely poorly. And in all cases, the effect of the wish should reflect the "easiest" means of granting the stated effect. Permanently transforming someone into an incubus, complete with a mental and spiritual re-creation, is definitely higher magic than a simple plane-shift effect.
Let him know that you like his DM style 90% of the time, but do NOT enjoy getting randomly dicked over "because reasons."
He's basically making you his play things on occassion and coming up with lame "metagame" excuses as to why it's okay for him to do so. Or, at the very least, ask/tell him that you don't like it whe your character gets screwed over because of decisions you make out of game (like the "shopkeeper" incident) or things the DM forces upon you that aren't RAW but he gives you a "because I said so" reasoning (like the Incubus thing). He also does things that make you seem like a puppet (like FORCING you to Plane Shift so that you would have to use the Wish that HE, THE DM, gave you, and then screwing you over because of something he FORCED upon you in the first place!)
He can punish you for making bad choices, sure, and it's not like you're asking to be coddled. But there is only so much your character is in control of during a game, and for some reason this DM wants to try and control that, too!
(Maybe next time you get a Wish, use it to wish for a better DM 
)
mellored wrote:
Timborama wrote:
It kinda sounds to me like the DM changed you into a succubus without thinking all the implications through.
After you were changed it was pointed out that being a succubus may disallow you from using your paladin abilities.
FrogReaver wrote:
Sorxores wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Right i don't think that the dm should have made him lose his paladin abilities.
Whether it's by raw or not that he would lose the paladin abilities it's still dm choice to follow raw in this situation or ignore it because it doesn't work for their group
Personally i think changing a character into a sucxubus isn't covered by raw. So I don't think the dm has to ignore any rules to let the character keep his paladin abilities.
Timborama wrote:
If the Wish changes your alignment and personality - which is entirely within the realm of possibility - then there's no reason the character would necessarily remain a PC.
Thats is true too but it could stay under pc control. Just depends. If it became an npc it could make a great antagonist, possibly blaming the party for his condition
Saelorn wrote:
KhronosVII wrote:
randl wrote:
There is an non-evil succubus in Planescape Torment after all. But then again it's Planescape Torment...
Incubus is best NPC race ever. The DM didn't nerf the player, he buffed him. Anyone actually look at the incubus stats? I would love to be an incubus! Resistance to most everything. A fly speed. Can go to ethereal plane at will. My goodness!
FrogReaver wrote:
i think I've agreed with that part already. Haven't i?
Just pointing out some positives. It wasn't like his dm said you turn into a crappy race like a goblin.
Did you notice how awesome it would be to be able to be an incubus race as a player? That's a pretty awesome buff. Sure it may not totally compensate to losing your class. But it's not like you lost your class without gaining some pretty awesome stuff in return
Noctaem wrote:
I think a question is, is the incubus a new creature that remembers being yor character, or you character wh happens to look (and have a few powers of) an incubus?
If the former, the DM effectively killed your character and handed you a monster as a character, if the latter your alignment should be unchanged (although you may need to fight your demonic nature).
I'd also like to point out that being able to hop into the Ethereal plane doesn't actually satisfy the wish. The PC wished to be able to return to his native plane, i.e., the one he's from. Becoming an incubus doesn't change where the character is from.
Novacat wrote:
KhronosVII wrote:
Lots of room for leeway here with a Wish spell and it is my belief that it will come down to a discussion between you and the DM, no one else. Changing you into an Incubus is in my opinion a physical change only. Everything else about you has stayed the same. While there have always been consequences for breaking your Oath in every version I have played of DnD there is no evidence that you have done so. Sure you have had something catastrophic happen to you, now let's see how you deal and adjust to it.
Should your new Incubus Paladin break your oath then yes, loss of abilities and repercussions, but not before and certainly not for something that was not a willfulor implicit choice on your part.
The DM has broken the RAW of the Wish spell. It is his/her prorogative to do that, but it is essentially a Plane Shift that the player has asked for and the spell should just happen without any negative consequences to the character. By manipulating a simple wish this way, the Wish spell has been completely nerfed in that game - who will risk losing their character to such a malicious whim?
There was commentary earlier on the theme of alignment, and I thought it might be pertinent to this question.
Alignment can be a straightjacket if you use it to gain abilities. The biggest instances I can recall were the paladins of yore, when they would do something remotely NOT lawful good, and would be threatened with losing everything if they did that. While that might be considered bad DMing, I would counter that it's bad playering, i.e. don't make a lawful good character if you don't intend on playing a lawful good character.
I would like to take what isireth said one step further: alignment is not solely the sum of your actions, but also the sum of your intent. Here's an example:
1 - A penniless dirty peasant begs for 100 gold pieces to save his home from being foreclosed. Stranger A has 2 copper and gives all of it out of the goodness of his heart.
2 - The same penniless dirty peasant begs for the same 100 gold. Stranger B is rich and gives the gold to get the dirt penniless person out of his face.
According to actions, Stranger A is "less" good than Stranger B. It might be argued that Stranger A's donation was almost meaningless, compared the outrageous charity of Stranger B... yet their reasoning was wildly different.
Let's add more details just to make this long-winded example sillier:
Stranger A is a fellow peasant who teaches children to read and sew. Stranger B runs a sweatshop and routinely works people to death. As a result, A cares for his friends and family, and expects that helping the dirty peasant strengthens the community, whereas B just wants to make profit off of able-bodied people and not be bothered by scum.
Anyhow, my point is that who you are is defined by what you do, but your alignment is more about your intent.
All that said, I don't think it's necessarily bad DMing to point out when a person is acting against their alignment. After a few instances (and I think this is also part of the Oathbreaker variant?) you start to realize that your character sheet said lawful nuetral, but really you're acting lawful evil, or whatever. There shouldn't be a sudden cosmic slamming of a character because they slip up (everybody has a breaking point, after all) but more like a few instances that are noted until the player and DM can agree that you're simply not playing the alignment you claim. In the paladin example, you may run into somebody acting evil, but proclaiming to desire a paladin character. What the *truth* may be is that they want the powers of a paladin, but they want to fit it into whatever concept they had in mind, rather than the actual class. This gives a great opportunity for roleplaying (an ex-paladin trying to find his/her path?) and new classes, whether they are special to specific settings, or even a homebrew.
Speaking up and saying you're not playing your alignment is a clue that you should change either your alignment or your character. This doesn't have to be a bad thing or punishment -- unless your sheet is only a way to gain a power dedicated to your alignment. If your character concept has a process and intent, you should speak with your DM and/or other characters about it, and when actions seem incongruent, explain why you are acting that way (perhaps offering no mercy from an evil creature is what your character conceives as the "greater good") as a way to enrich your character and the game experience. It's also a good idea to explain your motivations beforehand, perhaps as follows:
"I came from a poor family who was brutally hacked to bits by an imp princess. As a result, I hoard treasure for fear of losing everything again, and in the hopes of building an army and conquering the shire. I'll take by force from everybody but my friends -- because I have honorable scruples for those close to me -- but in the end I'm all about gaining power and never relinquishing it again. I think that's lawful evil, what do you think?" followed by back-and-forth and a way in which it will fit into the campaign. That way, when your character feeds and protects a defeated goblin and the group goes "Dude, that's not evil!" you can always point out that goblins are pack creatures, and you are hoping to gain followers by fostering loyalty and servitude through the power and mercy you are providing.
Admittedly, this only relates to the OP only slightly, but thought it might give a perspective for anybody dealing with alignment, losing powers, etc. My best advice is to create a concept you want to play, find an alignment that suits it, and then do your best.
DungeonKrusher wrote:
I thought of the same story. The difference for a DM is that he/she has no way to determine the true intentions and motivations of a player. The actions of the character are the only thing that can be judged, unless the player decides to elucidate more on their actions.
El_Condoro wrote:
Since wish is wide open, it depends on what transform means in regards to physical and mental ability. What sounds fun to me is to treat the transformation as an intelligent item, where the character fights some basic urges to do evil things, i.e. alter ego or multiple personalities.
El_Condoro wrote:
Wish: I wish that I could return to my native plane of existance at will.
So, yes, the "at will" part is ambitious or ambiguous. But a benevolent DM would allow it once and still meet the demands of the wish: "the character returned to their plane of existence at will, so what's your problem? You didn't say you wanted it to be a character trait or ability, and if you had I would have turned you into an incubus." The DM seems to have wanted to flex a bit of muscle in this case, though. As always - goes back to the DM, but I would feel robbed if I was this player.
Let's say, hypothetically, that the OP's now-incubus character continues to be a PC, and that the transformation does affect him mentally. So now his "nature" is of evil, but the player decides to make lemonade out of this and plays his character as continuing to "try to be good."
Every instinct in his body tells him to corrupt, manipulate, deceive and enslave, but he retains his mind, and is ashamed of these new impulses. Sometimes he slips, but he tries to be good, to the best of his ability.
What is that character's alignment?
KhronosVII wrote:
Novacat wrote:
This really could have been a good story hook if the DM had just taken you aside and explained how he wanted to twist your wish. And that he would work with you in a story arc where you infiltrated the other pcs as yourself in order to corrupt them.
Wish and the negative consequence thing just sucks usually. It's hard to on the fly come up with something balanced that still fits the terms of the wish.
Ahglock wrote:
OP, you should leave the campagin.
It's pretty clear that you have an antagonistic DM, and certainly an antagonistic player who are dispresepcting you through the veil of the game. Regardless of what the rules say, ultimately the game is about a group of people sitting down to have fun, and if someone's Pathfinder experience ruins other people's play, then they need to change their behavior. Telling a player that their character they've been playing for an extended period of time is now no-longer that character, without that player's consent, just because another player suggested it, is theft. Theft of your time and energy that you poured into that character, and they are robbing you of continued play.
Feel free to try to mend that bridge if those people are very important to you in Real Life, however they have violated the player-dm metagame agreement handily, and if this is habitual behavior (as you illustrated with the +4 mace nonsense) then the cycle of abuse will end when people stand up and say 'no more.' You've already stated that the behavior is likely to continue, and that the DM (and whoever this nebulous player is) are likely to ignore your complaints as you're a silly noob and they're 1337 P4thf1nd3r H4xx0rs.
Do not let them push you around.
Nachturnus wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
Nachturnus wrote:
So if the dm does something wrong more than once the best advice is leave......
thats not a good reaction In any kind of relationship imo
There does come a cutoff point but ya gotta admit with the limited context we have of his group or his interactions that the first piece of advice being given on a consistent basis should not be to leave the table
Nachturnus wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
well in this case it only happened once with a bad call of that magnitude and he's not even talked to the dm about it yet. Yet he's still being told leave the table as his first course of action? You really think that's the right advice?
MechaPilot wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
Advising the the most extreme course of action with the information that was provided by the op in this thread was as bad as the dm's call.
MechaPilot wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
IM curious if the player has gotten any news from the dm, or played his next session or not?
MechaPilot wrote:
DragonofFire wrote:
It has been 14 posts (including mine) since this thread was on-topic. Can we please refrain from derailing it any further?
Novacat wrote:
Am I the only one here who thinks that Wish shouldn't have been able to do the transformation in the first place? Permanantly turning someone into something else is a level 9 spell, ala Shapechange and True Polymorph. Wish can only mimic spells of 8th level and below.
Novacat wrote:
mellored wrote:
Novacat wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
Mephi1234 wrote:
I still say the DM was being a turducken, although I'm not sure if there was a *good* reason for it or not.
In olden times, we used to write down our wish, and the bigger the request, the more of a stickler the DM would be. Obviously, a wish is powerful and should grant something powerful, but -- all game mechanics aside -- something like "let me go home" after a successful confrontation doesn't seem to be outrageous and necessary for sticklerism.
(Aside from the concept of "home" and "origin" discussed above) Is Wish so fraught with risk that only lawyers and those who use legalese, or those who like to use commas, semicolons and clauses in their sentences will use them? Seems a waste of a 9th level spell and a disincentive to people who use everyday language if it is so open to 'abuse'.
El_Condoro wrote:
DungeonKrusher wrote:
Nachturnus wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
I always picture this:
Player A feels The dm made a bad call and leaves table.
Player A finds a new table and since that dm isn't perfect he eventually makes a bad call and player A leaves that table too.
This goes on forever.
The point is: don't be that guy!
There are situations where it's best to leave. But it shouldn't be your first or even second option.
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
Oh i totally agree. I give a new random group of strangers a lot less leeway than a group of friends or even a group that's played together a while.
As it stands the op wasn't playing with a new random group of strangers. That's apparent from his posts. As such it's either a group that he's played with for a whole or friends.
If it was a group he's played a while with then he's obviously enjoyed the game or he would have done left. Since he hasn't done left then advising him he needs to leave asap is over the top in this situation.
If it was a group of friends then leaving is likely even less of an option.
DungeonKrusher wrote:
and it's worth reiterating that the shopkeeper example isn't even in the same league of bad as the take away paladin abilities change.
Hes done one really bad thing that apparently was brought up after the session in a 5 minute conversation and is mostly based on knowledge from other editions.
MechaPilot wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
Personally I think DMs like that should be throat punched and have their dice taken away. But, I digress. woot.
If the op doesn't want to just leave and look for a new DM, I would suggest before the next session to get in contact with the DM and talk about it. Ask him what he expects you to do now; if he is making it so you can't use any abilities. Perhaps have him check out the free phb and dm pdf's off wizard to read up on things so he doesn't have to base decisions off other editions and games that aren't DnD.
Ask him if he plans on letting you do a quest for atonement or whatever to get your stuffs back. And in the meantime, what abilities are you to be using then. The only things tied in with your deity would be the spells and supernatural abilities, not your proficiencies. I dunno, like I said, I'd call the DM and idjit, throat punch them, and find a new game myself. Cuz like bronchitis, ain't nobody got time for d-bags like that. woot.
MechaPilot wrote:
Yeah, in my experience, putting up with this kind of crap is so not worth it. Just walk away and find someone who won't treat you like that. There's many DM's out there who would NEVER (myself included here) do the kind of stuff I've read in this thread. And elsewhere. The stuff you read about DM's online boggles the mind. How do these people keep the players at their table? As a player, I've left tables because of this kind of behaviour. It's just the best thing to do because the next group you play with could very well be amazingly better. And if it's not, move on and find another one. You enjoying yourself is way more important that sticking around hoping that the DM will suddenly stop acting in a way you don't like. You can't change people.
Nachturnus wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
DungeonKrusher wrote:
DungeonKrusher wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
mellored wrote:
DungeonKrusher wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
DungeonKrusher wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Noctaem wrote: