In today’s episode of Dungeons and Dragons Horror Stories, we have a tale about a Dungeon Master that gets too butt hurt when the players do well. After that, we have a story about a Dungeon Master that doesn’t take player builds into consideration, and punishes player for questioning things.
too many cats here for me to subscribe….
Second DM needs to play in a game where each round lasts 6 seconds. Don't have your action planned and said out loud in .5 seconds? Lose your turn.
Man, warrior within was such an awesome game
While I can understand saying no to using mounted combat while using an other PC as a mount, once the player did have a mount he should have been able to use the feat, granted it's a bit of a stretch to use that feat with your fists but that's a simple case of simply adding a weapon requirement. Also the dream sequence bit is stupid, if you present a puzzle you need to accept the fact that it will take the players a lot of time to solve it, also it's best to not mix puzzle with encounter, you can have hazards in your puzzle but they need to be pretty obvious.
The DM was totally wrong for having a meltdown, but that monk build sounds annoying af
These weren’t horror stories doggie. These were horror crisis. Shesh dnd can sure be dramatic.
"wHaT dO yOu dO tO sLoW yOuR FaLL?"
– "I uh, cast [Slow Fall]"
"yOu hAvE DiEd!!!"
I mean you don't have to be a rules lawyer to understand how this works, the two words are an adequate description.
"As a reaction I take a feather from my inventory, jam it firmly up my ass, and gently float to the ground, significantly reducing fall damage."
I'm not sure if the feather is necessary.
That DM was just out to screw players over. You just don't nullify player abilities.
A DM can freely modify a character template, and labeling purple worm as immune to being grappled except by something larger is reasonable. A DM who can't deal with a monk, who, even in Pathfinder is pretty weak, needs to up their game. Sometimes, grapple monkeys need to be put in their place..but its fairly easy to do.
Im in the 47.7 percent subbed!!!
Story 1: Granted the DM list his cool, but the OP was a total douche.
But I got to say…. 5e is a deeply flawed game for what they intended, but if you think you're going to grapple or Sentinel feat a huge creature at my table, you're going to get a "no"+ explanation, if that's not good enough you're going to get a response like "get fucked, I supercede the half baked rules"
Story 2:
Flurry of blows, one arm, forehead and two feet sounds good to me.
"Broiling out of the sand"
I fukkin died laughing
First one: that pathfinder build is a problem… generally, it is a problem when you can stun lock a big boss and have the pc's just pound on it. Unlike the 5e monk, the stunning strike has a limit to how often you can do it, unlike flurry of grapples. Not the most broken pathfinder build; it evens put at mid to high levels, but if the campaign is ending at level 12, it will not come up much.
Generally, the dm probably thought he was making the build to grapple oozes or whatever without regard to creature type. The rules still do not allow you to grapple things a certain size larger than you. Unless he is playing a giant, the op could not grapple the purple worm.
The gms problem was in trying to challenge his players by invalidating what the monk decided made his monk special. I as a GM stand STEADFAST aligned with the mentality of. "Let your monks deflect your arrows, don't shoot their wizards."
It’s always some autistic person playing a monk or bard having an episode. Too funny.
"How do you slow your fall?"
"My arm is a fucking grappling hook, figure it out you fucking mouth breather."
In both cases it sounds like the DMs are stuck in the "DM vs players" mindset, but the second is definitely more scummy that the first.
While I respect that slow players can really bring down the flow and atmosphere of a game, that big countdown was totally the wrong way to confront the problem.
Second one: like the monk theme, by the way. It is not the dm's job to make a way to use your abilities. The giant pouch incident proves they can use it. Especially because the condition for the ability is low light. Putting out touches, darkness spells, or even just cantrips can increase the darkness. Seems like the player just wanted every field to be suited to them all the time.
The mounted feat in 5e is this player trying to give themselves advantage all the time. This is broken, but not really how the feat works; your mount has to be larger than the enemy. Generally, he could go buy a war horse and use it; odd choice for a monk but not really too bad. I would not let a PC use another as a "mount" in combat as the feat specifically calls it a mount and not "a creature the PC is riding," personally.
Flurry of blows can be kicks, punches, head button, knees, elbow strikes… anything, raw. Losing an arm is not a deal breaker for a monk.
The prosthetic arm is kind of a tough call; depends on what you are trying to do with it, you probably do not want to reward a player for losing an arm because all your players will start chopping your arms off so they can have grapple hook hands. Cyberpunk has an inherent loss of Humanity every time you get gadgets added to your body to keep it grounded thematically and it does not end up as literal tanks.
Slow fall in older editions required the monk to be touching a wall in order to work… probably a mix up between versions. Annoying, but not terrible as the dm can kill you with spikes, poisoned spikes, or a fall. The dm just meant for it to be a lethal trap, not really concerned with how.
Preasuring a player to make a choice is a good tool to have in a dm's tool box. The doge is right; it makes players make mistakes, which sometimes you want. Good way to up tension. You do not want to push players to the point of breaking, but this is a good tool to have.
I'm pretty certain the first story has been told before? The only thing missing wasn't the OP mention his character has some special grapple feat with the DM disagreed but relented afterward?
story 1: From what I read, the DM got a bit salty when a player unexpectedly bodied an encounter. The way the party enjoyed the load of bread for a mini suggests they all know each other and that this is a fairly relaxed game. Its entirely reasonable to ask 'how do you grapple the boneless undead kaiju worm?' It wasn't really right to needle the DM over it later on. But the vagueness of the shit storm afterward has me scratching my head at OP's descriptions. I gotta wonder if it was really that bad because we go from massive, in depth detail to 'he got mad.' Ultimately a nothing burger of story as everyone comes out okay. its just a 55 year old acting like a modern 25 year old. Conclusion: might have happened, but who cares?
Story 2: OP, if a campaign is 85% fun, that's a good campaign. If you're upset over something not being the most amazing thing ever all the time then I hope you stay 12 forever.
"Way of the Shadow was thematic for his character[duh]" Huh? Context, OP. Context. Was he a drow? Was he an assassin? Was he an albino that was scared of his nightlight as a kid? What is thematic here?
While it might be a factor most people wouldn't think about, a DM would eventually pick up on and start factoring into encounters. It isn't right to goad the DM either, as that can lead to him just making even deep underdark caves all mysteriously brightly illuminated. But OP sounds like he's exaggerating. I like creating traps and boobytrapping stuff, but I can't do that if the situation doesn't call for it. Maybe halfling should have talked to the DM about what qualifies as dim light it wouldn't have been an issue.
Okay, how big were the frogs? Large? Huge? It might have been a legit reason why teh halfling couldn't reach a dude with.. what? A halfling sized sword? his bare hands? OP, you suck at explaining things. Details like this might be a reason why the Monk couldn't do it.
its at this point I begin to think OP is being intentionally vague to paint DM as an asshole purely because OP has a chip on his shoulder.
I've played games where injury tables occur. the monk losing an arm doesn't sound unreasonable if he takes too much damage and its a called shot. Hell, in modern D&D losing a limb is kinda meaningless because regenerate exists.
"How is a monk supposed to use Flurry of Blows with 1 arm" OKAY. THERE IT IS. OP clearly doesn't know what the hell he's talking about and is being a salty bitch. Flurry of Blows uses more than your fucking arms. its punches, kicks, fucking headbutts if need be.
Also: Why is OP the one bitching about this and not monk?
Monk seems to have been totally cool with getting his arm replaced. see? losing an arm is nothing in 5e.
It sounds like DM didn't know how to create new weapons. I would have made it a move action to retract the arm. As for him using it as a flail, maybe it was full of intricate, delicate parts? Details. But at this point I seriously doubt this happened as OP describes.
I personally believe OP is monk at this point and he's trying to act like a concerned 3rd party.
"I retired that character because I built her terribly." Says a lot about you, OP but you do you.
Wait. So the DM is clearly setting up some kind of time-loop/night shenanigans that you and the party need to use your brains to figure out, and you have a freak out? You off your character because you face a scary situation.
I get it. You're the problem player and you wrote this story to make yourself feel like you were the victim. I gotcha, OP.
So I was right. It was a scripted scenario where OP was never in any danger, it was just a fear effect, and OP freaked out wrote this because OP is holding a grudge.
I no longer believe anything OP says at this point. From what I read, DM tried to pull back the reigns once he saw people were having trouble with the dreams, but then continue to keep up the pressure once you got past it to hopefully get things back on track. But OP's attitude soured everything and ruined the night.
My earlier point about OP just making this up is further confirmed as OP says that no one at the table knows how slow fall works. You grip onto the side of the wall and slow it. Wow, so hard to figure out.
Conclusion: The game might have happened, but OP is writing this as a smear against the DM. OP was probably Monk, didn't bother to read his class, had a freak out when he was put in his first dangerous situation, and chose to be a big baby and rage quit. Then, to save face with himself, wrote this poisoned story to make himself feel better.
That one DM sounds like a DM vs Party sort that thinks screwing over and killing player characters are the best way to DM
I absolutely hate adversarial GMs. TTRPGs are not Player Vs GM, and BOTH sides of the screen need to get that through their head, but that GM in the last story needs to have a boot firmly shoved up his ass.
Personally I prefer to antagonize the dm and ruin his campaign but I feel character self ending is an underrated way to exit the game.
Honestly… op in the first story is in the wrong. Full stop.
Is it wrong of the DM to blow up full scale like that? Yes. It is. But the OP is clearly downplaying his own part to play in this story and is blatantly leaving out information to further hide things. Why write everything out in such detail before but suddenly get vague when the DM finally had enough? Very suspicious that everything that he says paints himself as just some guy trying to have fun when his actions show otherwise. He used a broken build that proved to be overpowered, and rather than make sparing use of it or trying to rebalance it to spare the DM, he just spammed it constantly to the point combat has no point. You abuse your class features to the point you no longer have to worry about combat? You are the ahole. It's not smart fighting. It's lazy. And the DM is the one suffering for it. The DM is the one doing 90% of the work in a game, and a lot of that work goes into planning and running combat. The DM clearly wasn't trying to kill OP and the party in any of these (OP admits DM only wants to run things if healer is there to back the party, so it's clearly not a DM vs. Players mentality). The DM was trying to challenge the party, and OP consistently kept ruining that. Even when DM finally presented a creative solution to counter OP's overpowered build by using the worm, the op and the party badgered him into backing down on a perfectly fine ruling. And then the party had the nerve to mock the guy to his face. What an absolute nightmare party. Whatever happened to the DM being allowed to have fun too? Guess OP forgot about that one. OP also belittles the DM about his age given he's in his 50s, so on top of being an entitled powergaming asshole, he's also ageist. Real winner.
OP in the second story obviously comes across as a gross exaggeration to the point of outright lying. DM sounds like a dude running a perfectly fine campaign with some minor misjudgments here with the OP and monk (possibly one in the same with how whiney this is written) acting like infants because "I don't get to do the cool thing I want to do because of logic and things". Logic plays a part in games too, not everyone plays games with Conker's Bad Furday levels of goofy logic. None of what the DM said is that harsh a ruling, you just didn't get your way and resorted to suicide of your own character and then use a panic attack to gaslight for pity because you can't figure out a timed puzzle. I have mental health issues, a lot of players do. You never use them to excuse your shit behavior like killing yourself in retaliation.
Both the OPs are liars or just childish in these. Makes me feel lucky to play with mostly good people.
Heh, that second story is a mood, last time I was a player in D&D I felt like I had multiple panic attacks over it, but idk if it was an actual panic attack or not.
Just to play the devils advocate, a monk can strike with legs and head as well.
Nipsy is such a majestic baby house panther – I mean: IT'S SO FLUFFY I'M GONNA DIE majestic. I love the little guy.
That last story boils my dingles! Sorry – it's just – if you're not prepared to be a DM with character aspects – tell your players – hey here are restrictions. AND DON'T DOUBLE DOWN when your players call you on your shit.
Going back to rewatch Nipsy and him making biscuits.
Reddit is the worst place on the internet, definitely not somewhere you should look for decent people to play with. All you will get there are either woke scum that exists only to push their agenda on you, psychopathic madmen ready to snap at you at any moment or someone just plain apathetic to the game.
How do you get bleeding injury from splitting wood on you knee? It literally can't happen 😀
Whole monk story is jsut "OP and his buddy making stuff up thinking it should work like this and DM ruleing otherwise"
Guy sounds like he was trying to win dnd.
Welcome back to another episode of: “everybody hates monks”
Reminds me when I played a ranger for the first time. " So, I'm at my Favorite Terrain, right?" Every time I entered in a forest. Too bad the DM always gave some reason for it not be considered a forest
All these r/rpghorrorstory characters should get together and show everyone what a good rpg should be like. I can see it now, gathered around DnDDoge in the back of Crispy'sTavren listening to SirKnox's tales as Den of the Drake stokes the fire, careful not to singe CrowesPerch.
Happy Holidays and have a great new year Doge! ♥
To me that sounds like two very awful parties with awful DMs… That really sounds like some players were super annoying the whole time and the first DM is the one apologizing for breaking down… That is sad, both side were just as bad… Probably more on the DM side for the second even though OP surely sounds like the kind of player that spend 10 minutes choosing the spells during battle.
0:21 – 0:24 Why not, you ask? I'm not subscribed because you keep begging for people to subscribe, and obsessively going on about how "[number]% of people aren't yet subscribed!". No offence, but doing that reeks of desperation.
If you would stop begging for people to subscribe, I would subscribe.
Wait, what? "How is a monk supposed to use Flurry of Blows with one arm?" Uhh, I dunno, maybe his other arm, his right leg, his left leg, his head, shoulder charges, ANY OTHER CREATIVE USE OF ONE'S BODY!?
Solo enemies have always been a bad idea in Pathfinder. The solo worm and solo scorpion were bad calls. If you got a mini-boss, give them minions, baby versions of themselves, worshipers, something to prevent them from being locked down.
Older GMs also come with a lot of baggage about DM vs Player mentality that they never outgrew.
Some DM's wanna be a Dark Soul's boss so bad, but don't understand the difference between a challenge and utter bullshit.