>>44778507 >i use something in my game that i didn't know was used before by something else >>oooooooh you mean like in X? pff you gotta be a bit more original, anon, X already did it, don't play like you don't know
>desert setting > escorting so merchants >Ambushed by some bandits. > Okay. par for the course. nothing awful >We're doing well enough against the bandits but not 2 rounds pass before >DMPC shows up >Half elf with dual swords. Like Zuko's in Avatar. > back flips off a cliff >kills everything.
Doesn't even roll for it. Just describes the DMPC kiling everything
"looks like you guys needed help"
>he takes us to his desert oasis >His character has mastered botany and magic powered air conditioner
>>44778507 I think I'm in a somewhat similar situation with my current DM. Whenever he plays my games he always guesses the plot from miles away, and I always do the same for him. We're a foil I guess.
>>44778507 >This DM who is happy you got the reference >This Player who doesn't blurt out the reference's source in the middle of the game and instead compliments the DM on his clever use of it You guys need to find better groups.
>that guy who says or references memes in-character.
Like okay it happens once per, like, five sessions so you can't blame him for over saturation out being annoying. And are generally innocuous on their own in their use or fit in a given context of conversation or something.
>>44778703 That fucking second one. I've been playing with these people for a bit now and everyone is pretty cool, except one guy. He's a fucking asshole. Every time something in mentioned he immediately blurts out some stupid fucking anime I've never seen and pretends that its the source material for whatever was named. On top of that he immediately plots how to kill everyone PC and friendly NPC alike, he has an ABSOLUTE NEED to be the alpha male in a group that just wants to play the game and not deal with that shit. On top of that EVERY character he plays is the fucking same. 3 games, space opera, super heroes, and D&D he is just being himself in a game. I wish I could tell this tool to fuck off but he's a package deal with three REALLY good players.
>That group who makes ridiculous, silent "WHAT THE FUCK" faces to eachother as you describe something odd or out of the ordinary. >But when it comes time to actually interact with those things, they're completely stone-face, monotone, and apathetic.
I have no idea. I just...no, no matter how hard I think, I can't comprehend.
>>44786922 Because he's a package deal with three people I want in my games. That's literally the only thing keeping him in my games. I can't even talk to him and ask him to try and act like less of a tool, last time I did i pulled him aside and asked him to tone down the testosterone a little and stop shouting over everyone and stop giving everyone including me, the person running the game so much attitude both in game and out if game. He assumed I was threatening him and immediately tried to assume alpha dog position by telling me just how seriously he takes threats and that he would "do something drastic" if I was threatening him.
>All these people who care so much about whether something is or isn't being referenced Shit, I openly talk with my players about my influences when building a setting and ask if there's any material that they think that I should consume and consider for possible use.
>that player who gets super buttmad over being presented with something and it not working the way he wants it to or thinks it should
>you see three iron golems walking down the hall >fuck you iron golems aren't our level appropriate challenge! You're wrong! You can't do that! >hasn't even made any rolls yet to see through the illusion and notice its actually an ogre mage and two ogres with a silent image spell
Unimaginative fucks like this are why I dont use illusions and flat out tell my players what powers or spells my monsters or villains are using.
>>44778507 >Trying to run a fucking game for four people here >One of them won't stop making snide observations about the inspiration for the setting in the middle of scenes like anyone cares about his autism >Literally sucks all immersion out of the gaming experience as he frantically taps away on his phone trying to spoil shit for the other players
You're gonna be out on your ass in the cold soon, desu.
>>44787041 Despite him, I'm having fun. It takes three REALLY intelligent and witty role players that he's packaged with and one long time friend of mine to balance his retarded ass out but I'm hoping he will even out in time. He's still new to all this. Maybe he will learn from the example of the chill and non-toxic people around him and learn to be less toxic?
>>44786994 I also just remembered we had someone like that in my own PnP group who has gotten smacked down hard for it. Power-gaming, alpha-dogging, the works. He got himself kicked from most games within a few weeks.
Guys, big difference between "being inspired by" and "blatantly ripping off". Without people taking inspiration from things, most of what exists in entertainment wouldn't exist. I have never DM'd, by the way.
>>44778507 This has become an in-joke among my players. Whenever I bring something up they'll compare it to something similar from a book or movie or TV show causing me to congratulate them for revealing how I'm a fraud.
>that player who thinks everything is a reference >that player who uses reference humor >that player who insists on constantly derailing and interrupting your world building attempts but doesn't want to DM because "its haaaaard"
meet us halfway here folks, for fucks sake we're only human.
>>44787158 Not that guy, but players want their characters to be able to do things. If the DM solves all the problems for the player characters then he's just putting on a show for the players and it would not need their presence; he could instead write a book and give that to the players rather than take up time showing off his own special character.
>>44787386 All the problems? Or just, like, one problem one time? I guess the town guard better not catch any criminals, and the local informant better not have any information. If some jerk is beating up a kid in the street, clearly everyone around can't lift a finger, not even their own parents, because they're not PEE-SEES.
Don't speak to the general case; the general case is obvious. Explain how having someone better than the PCs exist in the setting, and being really cool ONCE is a problem.
>>44787426 No, I think I will not explain how someone somewhere that's not the PCs solving a problem is an issue.
I will however ask why you cannot see why an NPC showing up to "save" player characters from something that they were able to handle fine and then show off his awesome air conditioned crib is annoying.
>>44787024 Now see even if you weren't playing d&d (though by your language I'm thinking that or pathfinder maybe), that mindset it created bugs the hell out of me.
The idea that gms are supposed to present you with level appropriate (the fuck does that actually mean in the context of a plot or world?) challenge is absurd. Yes they should consider the capabilities of the players, and yes some degree of balance should be considered. But the idea that the world revolves around the players and only the players, and will cater itself to their every move is just immersion breaking.
Sometimes the players should just stomp a challenge because they picked an easy fight, or some baddie picked the wrong one. Sometimes their foes are just in such superior number or just flat out better, that barring some hardcore planning and execution they will lose if they don't run. And sometimes yes, they should be on par with the challenge they've come across, it's just the idea that this should always be the case that bugs me.
>Enjoy playing music during sessions to help set/enhance atmosphere >Usually just take it from video games >When I begin playing it, one guy will always interrupt me mid sentence going "Damn I know this song, where is it form?" >2 minutes later will interrupt me again mid-sentence naming where I got it from
>>44787426 >Explain how having someone better than the PCs exist in the setting, and being really cool ONCE is a problem I would, but first you should explain how "beating up bandits" with "backflips and everything" and then "takes them home to see his awesome stuff" isn't going to be noticed by players with basic pattern recognition that the game isn't going to be about them.
>>44787390 >kid >personnel, etc Come on, man. You can't be this dumb.
>>44787462 >something they were able to handle fine There wasn't any peril then, was there? I mean, in your fantasy settings do adventurers and heroes not meet each other during the course of adventuring?
>>44787466 >taking away their chance to shine Seriously, what? It was a minor skirmish with bandits, not a final fight for the glory of this life's fading. Not every encounter has to end with bodies, XP and loot. Sometimes people just run away, or a third more powerful party shows up, or the two groups make a tentative peace and you find yourself with no reason to fight at all.
I've been playing PnP for probably a lot longer than you, so let's address the actual discussion instead of trying to snipe at my credentials, ok?
>>44787508 Basic pattern recognition? This is Encounter One in the supposed campaign, I'm sorry you've had shit experiences but you redflagging that shit and bouncing isn't a response to actual conditions, it's just you creating an artificial criteria to meet that bogs down the culture in the hobby.
Would I do it that way, or does it sound kind of juvenile? No and yes, but that's not what people are pointing to and complaining about, they're complaining about not having the spotlight 24/7.
Execution is everything, and the fact that you fucked right off in a new group that you didn't know after one session where you felt kinda triggered on the suspicion that the GM might be no good? Damn, son.
>>44787554 Let's put it in simpler terms. >party beating up bandits and players are having fun >DMPC shows up >players suddenly stop having fun because DMPC does everything for them
Can you understand why players might be annoyed by having their fun surgically removed?
>Execution is everything, and the fact that you fucked right off in a new group that you didn't know after one session where you felt kinda triggered on the suspicion that the GM might be no good? Damn, son.
I'm not the player in that campaign. I generally only run games with my friends, and have a higher tolerance of silly stuff happening and a decent amount of trust that they'll run a decent game, but that's because I know them to make good campaigns. Other people might have less tolerance than me, and for a pickup game that starts like that? I can see where they're coming from. Not sure why you can't.
>>44787554 >Not every encounter has to end with bodies, XP and loot. Never said that. Where the hell did you read into that?
Here's my philosophy, shared by a lot of GMs: the game is about the players. They are the stars, the main cast of the story! They had been employed to protect a caravan from bandits and they were handling things without any issues: then a random DMPC swings by and kills all of the bandits because "OMG he's so cool, everybody look at my perfect character and how good he is blah!"
So yeah: are you advocating that it's actually alright for GMs to have DMPCs that are perfect and can do everything the players can a hundred times better and cooler? Because that's what you're doing right now.
>>44787498 This reminds me of one of the D&D 3.5 published modules, Forge of Fury.
In the dungeon, there is a Roper. The party will be 3rd or 4th level, and it will curb stomp them if they fight it. There is opportunity to sneak past, or negotiate with it etc.
The book explains: "this is to teach your new players that sometimes fighting is a bad idea."
However, it qualifies this with [paraphrased] "if your party are retards and will just attack it without thinking, and learn nothing, just pretend the roper isn't there, becaue they will just die and get butthurt."
>>44787554 Not everyone has 5 hours free to hear about this cool character backflipping off bandits and killing cliffs only to show off how cool his magic botany AC-DC concert is. And in pickup games there's about a 50% chance that if the first session is terrible enough the rest are going to be just as bad if not worse.
I'd rather keep looking to find a good GM who has demonstrated they can enthrall me or make me enjoy myself rather than plug more time into someone who has yet to show me they can.
>>44787554 You seem to be incapable of understanding that the players should be the protagonists of the campaign. Encounter One is their first big action scene and a character establishing moment for the more combat-oriented characters. If the DM totally ignores this and uses the occasion as a character establishing moment for his SUPER SPESHUL NPC who overshadows everyone present, then he clearly doesn't understand how stories are supposed to work. So yes, this is a sure sign of a bad DM.
>>44787602 I'm sorry your players only enjoy killing bandits to the last man, and not meeting a new ally who invites you to their home.
Joking aside, of course I can see how it /might/ be annoying. But how it must necessarily follow that every interaction from now on will be like this, and that any sane player has to abandon ship? No, that hasn't been explained to me.
I had a friend once who did a bit of GMing (none of our games overlapped), and they mentioned once the concept of putting some borderline shit into the first game, just to weed out the assholes; apparently they do that sort of thing with television shows pretty often, too. They expose you to some shit early so that if you're going to have an extreme negative reaction to, say, sexual content or dadaistic humour, you self-select out of the audience so that the show can craft a better, more tailored and artful story by avoiding the temptation to cater to the widest base of appeal possible.
I really disagreed with the notion at the time, but then I've been really lucky with my player pool over the years. Maybe he had a point, and it's better to get rid of the time bombs early.
>>44787629 >Never said that. Where the hell did you read into that? When you seemed to imply that when player's don't get to beat up bandits, their fun must automatically cease.
>They are the stars, the main cast of the story! Yes, and main characters sometimes meet new people - and not always in a tavern! I get what you're saying, I really do, but have you really never pulled a bait-and-switch, where chasing one quest turns into the hook for another, better quest? Again, there is an art to it, if it's done shitty it'll turn out shitty just like anything else. Quite honestly, I find the whole idea kind of fun and I'm going to work it in to my next session just to see how it goes.
>>44787660 Technically you can also show off the scale of your campaign and potentially the BBEG; but the general thrust is correct; the first session tends to colour the rest of the campaign, and you want the players to feel their characters. Not showcase allies. That can be done later on.
>>44787669 >that any sane player has to abandon ship? No, that hasn't been explained to me. No-one said that. We simply acknowledge that we can see why they're doing so.
>Maybe he had a point, and it's better to get rid of the time bombs early. It's a shame that the earlier DM was clearly weeding out players with standards and common sense.
>>44787669 >When you seemed to imply that when player's don't get to beat up bandits, their fun must automatically cease. You inferred wrong.
>Yes, and main characters sometimes meet new people - and not always in a tavern! I know. But that GM from the OP that we are talking about was 99% not going to develop it in a good way: when fighting bandits then suddently DMPC! teleports behind each of them and kills them all in a matter of seconds, it is reasonable to assume that the GM is planning for the story to revolve around the DMPC, not around the players.
Had the bandits been more people and then someone arrives to help the party- without killing all the bandits himself because he is soooo badass. Then I would be more inclined to believe that these NPCs will be helpful in our quest. Do you understand now?
>>44787669 Things I'll be looking out for: - did my players find the situation refreshing at face value? - was the net end result on play positive or negative? - how hard was it to execute properly, if at all?
Should be fun. I'm going to ride the line on this one and find out just how true these ideas are.
>>44787629 >are you advocating that it's actually alright for GMs to have DMPCs that are perfect and can do everything the players can a hundred times better and cooler? No, I'm really not. Being able to beat up a bunch of ratty bandits, having two non-combat skills that you're pretty good at, and owning a house doesn't make you some kind of everliving god. Was it probably much worse than they bothered to describe? Sure, they seemed pretty mad about it. But then that's the difference between just saying "oh man they were fucking unbearable" and actually showing me why that was the case.
I mean, is this really only a bitching thread, or is it a place where you can also actually discuss these things and maybe raise the level of understanding around here? Because I don't see a reason that it has to the former only and not the latter also.
>>44787659 >Not everyone has 5 hours free Even taking into account the fact that you're knowingly exaggerating, you're being ridiculous. Assuming you're a GM, describe a scene where a guy beats up a bunch of bandits in cool fashion. Now do a little introductory banter with players and describe the journey to the house, and then the interior. Did that seriously take you more than 1 minute? Assuming your players don't get too bogged down with Sense Motive and Knowledge(Local History) checks and shit like that, equally retarded stuff, you are way, way under the pain threshold for time. You certainly saved time compared to finishing combat (which apparently wasn't very riveting anyway, no real danger etc). In exchange for some dice rolls, you were introduced to a new character, new environments and more options.
>>44787704 I would avoid having the players meet the BBEG in the first session tho. At the first session the characters at that weird state, where their personalities and priorities are not really there, so it's harder for the BBEG to do something that will cause the characters to REALLY hate his guts. It tempts the DM to go the easy way and kill off the characters' families, which is just overused and lazy at this point.
>>44787704 >No one said that This really isn't true. That disclaimer was added later on, and only by some in the conversation. I've also clarified that I can see how it might annoy some people, but that doesn't seem to have afforded me any of the slack you hand out to yourself and people who agree with you.
>>44787718 >>44787659 >we don't have 5 hours >matter of seconds So which is it, that it takes too long or that it's over too quickly? And if that's not what you meant, why did you say it?
>>44787718 >You inferred wrong. From >>44787466: >It's no fun if NPCs hog all the glory. This is in reference to the bandits getting defeated. The crux here is that this implies rather directly, that fun can only come from the glory of combat, when in fact there are lots of kinds of fun, not all of which are clobbering bandits.
>we >/tg/ Come on, man. Chances are I've been here as long as you or longer. Don't start that.
>>44787776 >Being able to beat up a bunch of ratty bandits, having two non-combat skills that you're pretty good at, and owning a house doesn't make you some kind of everliving god. Never said that. Also, where do you infer from the OP that the bandits were scrawny/weak? The PCs might also have been low level still and had to have more than one round to kill all of them, before the incredibly high level DMPC just jumps in the middle and slaughters all the bandits they were fighting on equal level without much effort. That is a massive red flag for a GM.
>In exchange for some dice rolls Not the one you were replying to but... seriously, couldn't you introduce your character later? What if the players were having fun with combat? Are you Seriously going to take that away from them? Because you want to introduce your oh-so-speshul snowflake DMPC?
>>44786994 Had someone like this. Killed his character the session after I tried to talk to him and he said "fuck you, don't like it, let's take it outside." He flipped, tried to grab me, put him in a hold until he passed out. 2 other help me throw him out of the house. He never came back >tfw rolling on a mat groping other guys for 4yrs actually paid off
>>44787893 What is this, highschool? I'm trying to talk to children like they're people, what am I doing
>>44787887 >Putting words in my mouth It follows directly from what was said. Don't try to wiggle out from it. If you actually think you can show how the paraphrase isn't valid, please do so.
>You're replying to different people senpai That's probably why I referenced two different people's posts, kohai.
>>44787868 >first encounter of the game >why would the bandits be weak? I don't think I need to explain this.
>couldn't you introduce your character later? What if the players were having fun with combat? Are you Seriously going to take that away from them? Because you want to introduce your oh-so-speshul snowflake DMPC? Lol hooooold up, back up. /My/ DMPC? Let's not make this personal. Or maybe that what you guys want.
Would you all rather just jeer at me and say "lol you must be that faggot or why would you be defending him?"
Because if that's what you all are into, then I'll just go. There's no good conversation to be had here. inb4 some kid's version of a witty retort.
>>44788004 >It follows directly from what was said. Don't try to wiggle out from it. I never said that players only find combat fun: you did. I said that resolving encounters for them is bad, from where you took that it only means killing and fighting is beyond me.
>first encounter of the game OP didn't say it was the first encounter. Nor what level the PCs were. You're only assuming things.
Since you're confused, let me reiterate my point: players can have fun in more ways than one (which you agree with... I think) and DMPCs are bad m'kay?
>>44787796 Oh, of course. He doesn't need to be physically present; and there's plenty of ways to fuck it up, but if done right it can provide the sort of theme you are going for. From an M&M game whacky silver age comic book villain who rants over a giant television declaring his hate for peanut butter while the players beat up some mooks nonlethally, to a deep demon lord who has poured his hate onto the land, and manifestations of evil have sprung forth to torment the living in seductive calls of corruption.
>>44787853 >So which is it, that it takes too long or that it's over too quickly? And if that's not what you meant, why did you say it? The guy took five hours to describe a few seconds of action, how about that for dual redundancy terribleness?
But both can be a problem. Particularly galling; when a DMPC renders half an hour of your character's efforts useless by wiping an enemy force within "the space of a few seconds" when you were fighting them perfectly fine earlier. What was the point of making the PCs roll for anything if the mooks were all going to be killed off instantaneously afterwards?
>>44787704 You know, it wasn't the first session but it was a turning point in a campaign of mine where I did introduce a rather powerful npc.
The players ended up in the employ of one player's liege, a fabulously wealthy, and absolutely fabulous elvish noble. They were given the task to look cultural and religious items from an ancient elvish temple he had gotten wind of.
So he also hired a courier (read that as sneaky stabby thief) whom had previously delivered him the map to the location. Said courier wasn't by themselves better than the players, but they had quite a lot more resources at their disposal and as a result held much more magic items.
They served several purposes both from a game design standpoint and a practical one. A) they were significantly more mobile than the party. B) they had access to long range teleportation, essential for the looting of large heavy things (especially since the temple was surrounded by swamp and not easy to get to). C) They could read elvish, which none of the party were able to do at the time. D) Thanks in part to them saving this npc's life (because they managed to get a good bump on the head when a march troll flipped the player's boat, and almost drowned). An additional reward for the quest was a contact that was particularly good at acquiring things.
But most importantly I was introducing a good deal more magic than previously included in the game, and they served as a zero to the party's megaman. A sort of oh hey, look what they can do (which soon will be things we can do). To get them thinking of what sort of magical things they might want (the payout for the job was rather large).
Point is if done right powerful npcs can be enjoyable even as tag alongs. In character a few players didn't care for them, but that was mostly because priest (because morality), and the knight himself (because honor). Which lead to snark all around.
>>44778507 >accused of ripping off material >players assume they know exactly how to act based on said material >I did base my campaign on said material, but also put a significant twist on it >players' assumptions bite them in the ass when things don't happen the way they thought they would, or think they should
>>44788033 >I said that resolving encounters for them is bad You said this with the words "It's no fun if NPCs hog all the [combat]". Now, let's go through the meaning of this actual statement, slowly. >It's NO fun ie, the amount of fun is zero, >if NPCs hog all the combat
In other words, there is no fun to be had if NPCs and not PCs resolve combat. Since they aren't doing combat, they can't possibly be having fun. I know this isn't what you INTENDED, but it's the meaning of the words you said.
>players can have fun in more ways than one Obviously. >DMPCs are bad m'kay? This is categorically true if you define them as bad to begin with; then it becomes a question of why, and whether or not a given npc counts as a dmpc as you've specially defined it.
So, either it's not a very meaningful statement because it's true by it's very definition, or you need to explain what makes it so in this case.
>>44788035 >The guy took five hours to describe a few seconds of action Nowhere was that stated in the original anecdote, or even after, I think. Sure, if that happens it's objectively bad for a number of reasons. But that's just your postulate right now.
>>44788004 >immediately open up with an insult >act like you're above insults when people call you a cunt for not understanding basic concepts >while continuing to insult people >get btfo >OH YOU GUYS ARE JUST STUPID AND TOTALLY BELOW ME I'M LEAVING NOW BYE
Pull your head out of your arse, take off your fedora and drop the attitude. Whatever it takes to stop you from pretending your shit doesn't stink, you dumb sack of nigger shit.
>>44788090 >It's no fun if NPCs hog all the glory. This is what I wrote. Now on to the definition Simple Definition of glory Popularity: Top 20% of words : public praise, honor, and fame : praise of a god or goddess : something that brings praise or fame to someone or something : something that is a source of great pride
It's glorious when the bandits break morale and flee. Doesn't mean the PCs have to keep fighting until they're all dead. Or the bandits surrender. Doesn't mean the party has to slaughter them all.
It's no fun if the DMPC is there to parley with the enemy warlord who can be bribed to stop his crusade against the king the PCs are working for. It's not fun if the DMPC is there to diplomacize the king for the safe passage of the party or to tell him about the grave danger the kingdom is facing.
>This is categorically true if you define them as bad to begin with; I have never seen an instance in which the term DMPC was used to refer to an enjoyable and helpful NPC: since the story should revolve around the PCs, if the DM has his own one that starts hogging the spotlight 24/7, it is bad and defeats the purpose of storytelling. Having a helpful NPC that doesn't hog the player's spotlight is much better.
>>44788112 Open up with an insult? In response to getting called flat out stupid in the most juvenile way possible, sure. You're not going to make me feel bad about that one, hoss.
See how some of those other people responding to the same post aren't just doing what you're doing? It's called engaging the topic. You should look into it.
I'm sorry getting disagreed with makes you default to conversational gems like > you dumb sack of nigger shit but you're pretty much showing your colours now. I bet you think the ass in your image is the one trying to express their honest opinion, and the hero is the one cutting the other guy off as rudely as possible.
>>44788146 >I have never seen an instance in which the term DMPC was used to refer to an enjoyable and helpful NPC And that's totally cool with me, I agree. So then asking me if I think a DMPC is bad on the basis of certain actions becomes completely redundant, because we know he's bad based on the fact that he's a DMPC.
The real question becomes "are they really a DMPC? how do we know?" And this is the point where we refer to the original anecdote to try and see if they've painted a broad enough picture to be reasonably sure one way or the other, or if they've simply told us that they were bad with a few dramatic details thrown in for colour without actually describing what was so bad about it.
>>44788166 Saying that defeating enemies in combat is fun is very different from saying that there is zero fun outside of defeating enemies in combat.
>>44788156 >In response No. >are you sure you're not just a spoiled brat Shut your cunt mouth.
You're not worth talking to because you're not here to discuss anything, because you've already made the decision that you are right and everyone else is wrong, and you don't even make the effort to talk with common decency. It's obvious in how you type. And yet, you think everyone else should extend that courtesy to you. Eat shit. You're not worthy of being spoken to like a reasonable adult.
>but you're pretty much showing your colours now Yes, take the obvious bait and get offended, nigger shit. You haven't even accepted the fact that there's multiple people in this thread disagreeing with you, because your face is permanently plastered against your colon.
>>44788193 >Saying that defeating enemies in combat is fun is very different from saying that there is zero fun outside of defeating enemies in combat. Please tell me about the great dialogues you had in combat. Or the mysteries you solved while in combat. Or how exhilarating moving your guy is.
>>44788201 So, if one person involved in the telling of a story were to unilaterally end a fight, that would constitute a defeat of the principles of of collaborative storytelling?
I wan't to make sure I'm understanding you correctly, because it seems to me that most encounters don't end with the party joining hands and summoning the power of love, or executing some ingenious combined attack. If the wizard has all five of the remaining gobbos in a Fireball-sized cluster, go for it. You're not "hogging the spotlight" or "taking agency" away from the other players.
>People who care about rip offs I'm literally running a WoD game set in Gotham City.
>>44787377 >I had a game where one of my players could not fucking believe bulls eye lanterns were not invented by pumpkin scissors. I hear it's amazing when the famous giant purple stuffed worm in flapjaw space, with a tuning fork, does a raw blink on Hairi Kairi Rock! I need scissors!! 61!
>>44788231 >these are the only ways to have fun ever. Also baddies and players badmouthing one another. Especially when they're related to one another in some way. Not all combat is I want to hit that guy, I roll to hit, repeat.
Trying to figure out how to hurt something with a particular weakness, or trying to figure out how to deal with something else as combat rages on. Got to open this sealed door while being pinned down, or fighting during a chase. Environmental puzzles integrated into a combat scene, or simply making the most out of the environment.
Sounds like you've either had shitty combat in your games, or you're just not into that aspect of our hobby.
Seriously, there's nothing new under the sun, so why the fuck even try to come up with something original? Someone somewhere already did it anyway so the best I can do is take inspirations from the things that already exist.
>>44788216 See, a certain amount of joking was lampshaded by the spoilered "pls no bully". This was before things escalated and got outright rude. But if that's the only way you can see it, I'm not sure how to help you.
>you've already made the decision that you are right and everyone else is wrong My disagreement with that is why I'm interested in talking about this in the first place. Not sure what your samefag image is trying to say, but you're damned well being rude to me and I'm not really saying anything untoward to you.
>You can tell by the way you type. This is ironic when you're complaining about me having pre-decided things. Oh well. What can you do.
>>44788231 If you're just plodding from attack to attack without any, you know, roleplaying or context, then sure, I guess. But it kind of proves my point for me.
>>44778507 My DM gives me a look when I even mention a similarity between his game and something from another medium. I never accuse him of ripping it off or anything, he just doesn't seem to like that his desert-based post-apocalyptic campaign where women are considered luxury items may bear some resemblance to a certain recent blockbuster.
>That player in an online game who posts shit in chat if something in the game has reminded him of something. >Or that person (who isn't the gm) online or with a phone decides something we're doing needs a theme song. Especially when they have shit taste in music.
>>44788302 Every post you've made in this thread had an insult laced into it, but STOP THE FUCKING PRESSES, SOMEONE SAID A MEAN WORD AT ME. But it makes a lot of sense what you're doing; you got called out, and now you're backpedaling.
>I was only pretending to be retarded
Well done, nigger, you still look like a retard. It'd be better for you if you stopped posting.
>>44788402 Pretty much none of what you're saying is true. But we're past the point where were actually talking to each other, and now we're just talking AT each other, right? I haven't spit venom with every post, I didn't get my feelings hurt, and I'm sure as hell not recanting any of my statements.
I mean, say what you want but none of your shitflinging is sticking. But, you've made it clear that you're going to proceed by trying to crucifying me no matter response I make. So get on with it, I guess.
>>44788352 Aww, you poor little bikkle. If you're unhappy and think that meds would make you feel less insufferable, why not see somebody about getting your hands on some? It might work out really good, you know?
>>44788004 >I'm trying to talk to children like they're people
And this isn't even mentioning your downright terrible arguments and the strawmen you've been building for the entire thread.
>But, you've made it clear that you're going to proceed by trying to crucifying me no matter response I make Because every post you make is objectively wrong, and you're acting high and mighty about being wrong. Wrong about the original point, and wrong about everything that came after, and wrong when you started backpedaling and accusing everyone else of having emotional investment when they call you a dumb cunt.
Now stop posting, you fucking cretin. I'd hope you'll kill yourself as well, but you're too much in love with the stink of your own shit to do something that beneficial to society.
>>44778507 This is actually a long running gag in my gaming group. A player who ran a few games I wasnt in but several (not all) of the other players were in fake accuses me of stealing ideas from his game, but only the most generic ones that cant even be called his in the first place. "KILLER ROBOTS HUH? Stealing my ideas again!"
>>44782718 The running joke in all my campaigns is that absolutely no plan survives contact with the enemy, and 80% of the time fighting is the dumb option. Oh but when fighting occurs...the party always enjoys it, even when it's lethal to their character.
>>44788448 You can, under the quality of posts rule. It doesn't matter if someone is shitposting on purpose, or shitposting because they're legitimately too retarded to tell its shitposting; the end result is the same and against the rules
>>44788752 Pre bronze age humans barley capable of language. Everything is a rehash of their tales and shallow real world discoveries bolted on like guady streamers. You will never see or hear an original idea as the true creators have been dead for millennia.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.