Gaming Vents:

>want to get new players for my game
>player who's house we play at is too scared of rapists to let me invite people she doesn't know

I get that it's her place and she's in the right that you can't trust randos, but god damn I just want some new players.

>Joined a game on an invite from a friend
>One of the players is a dick to everyone, really argumentative
>After two sessions, still couldn't tell if his character was a joke character or not, only just recently received confirmation that the character was indeed intended to be the way it is
>Even after having been confronted about being a dick, continued to be a dick to the other players.

I'm probably gonna drop the game, which is unfortunate since half the people in it are friends of mine, it's just this one rando the DM recruited off some gamefinder somewhere that is kinda ruining it for me, and the DM won't kick the problem player on account of "not wanting to exclude anyone."

And it's not just me either. The entire group doesn't like him.

>>49570473
>spend time putting together session
>only one player actually involves themselves in the game, another usually does but this week was tired, and another is completely fucking incapable of doing shit despite me intentionally creating an area and npcs specifically for them to interact with after they complained the previous session
asking the group what they want to do and getting complete fucking silence kills my desire to run this game

File: image.jpg (47KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 500x375px

>>49570473
>Join game group
>been with the group for two years
>Only one, by gm admission, to ever be constantly on time and ready
>Everyone else is excuses out the ass
>Some times "Why are you playing if life it's this hectic" levels
>Group has always put up with and had to deal with members who are retarded when it comes to scheduling
>Rescheduled game day multiple times to please these members
>Minor bitching on my end but put up with it because it's a great game
>Eventually have to ask if we can reschedule
>Gm "tries" to get the group to vote
>No one does anything
>Am fucked out of the game because of this
>Gm says I can join in if the schedule ever changed to a better day
>not planning on
A week later and I'm still fuming over shit cockery, guess that shows me to try and be a polite gamer.

>>49570756
That fucking sucks, dude.

>Change system
>GM wants to translate chars
>Try my best to translate char taking into account stuff that worked before doesn't work now
>"Shit, anon, your character was able to do this minor thing that you almost never used and now he can't, you aren't trying hard, redoo"
>"If I spend every resource ever I might, and just might, be able to do that minor thing I almost never used and in the process literally lose everything that made my character my character and every key abilities"
>"Well, do that, after all this minor thing you never used it is what I think it's important even though I know you never used it"
FUCK YOU!!

>Start campaign at FLGS
>Super lucky—not a That Guy in the group
>Five great players who show up consistently each week
>Totally engaged with the game
>I occasionally have to cancel a session b/c work
>So we move the game to another day so that won't happen
>Everyone can still play, the game goes on
>thumbsup.jpg
>But it's also my senior year of college, in a STEM major
>Homework and senior projects and GREs and grad school aps
>This plus working full time is starting to crush me
>I want to end the campaign so that it's not a distraction
>But I can't do that to my players, they're great
>Player #5 is a new player, just joined a couple months ago, probably best in the bunch
>Falling seriously behind in school
>I don't know how long I can keep up the charade

>>49570546
>too scared of rapists to let me invite people she doesn't know
Is it like a paranoia thing or does she live in a bad area?

File: image.jpg (89KB, 887x1097px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 887x1097px

>>49570821
I'm beyond mad, just goes to show you that someone can say every nice thing in the world to you and still stab you in the fucking back in the end.

Fuck.

>DM for a group of players including some guys from work and their band mates.
>First five sessions go just fine, always ask if everyone had fun/what they would like to see in the future.
>Include their back stories so they meet NPCs from their past.
>Everything is awesome.

And then I broke the DM's cardinal rule... Never plan more than a game ahead.

>Write out lots of plot. Make sure everyone has a chance to shine...
>Got it just about sorted and then they start to flake one by one.
>The dumbass stoner druid flakes first. Then the barbarian. Then the sorcerer.
>Games start to get cancelled last minute, as I'm driving over to our meeting place.
>I was literally pulling into the driveway when they told me they cancelled it the last time.
>Finally give up.

What kills me is I don't know if they were bored, or what. If they didn't like my DMing, at least tell me so I can either fix it or stop wasting my time.

That was the last time I DMed. I want to get back into it, but I'm gonna run something lighter, possibly for one or two players, and online text-only. I just don't got anymore funny voices in me at the moment.

File: My rage will destroy Uranus.gif (468KB, 500x350px) Image search: [Google]

468KB, 500x350px

>>49570646
Fucking this

>Have friends who want to get into RPGs
>They're weebs, so I come up with weeb campaign
>Scheduling gets in the way, so we move the game from in-person to pbp
>I ask that they post at least once a week to keep the game rolling
>"Okay!!!" they say
>Months later, only one player checks in per week
>Other players say they don't have time to log into a website
>See them dicking around on Line and Facebook while complaining about having nothing to do at work
>mfw

>two of my four players are gung fucking ho to play Shadowrun, despite the fact that they already play with their work buddies, the other two just go with the flow so they're useless for determining what we play
>It's been almost a year since we proposed I run it and we've run 1 session
>At this point I fucking hate Shadowrun

>>49570987
Mix between bad past experiences (molesters, bad boyfriends and such) and paranoia, I suppose.

>>49570546
Get your own house...?

>>49571169
I want to. Only thing I can afford right now is a very tiny apartment.

>climbing canyon wall (in enemy giants base or whatever)
>two cave openings writhing reach
> Party chooses one, tells the paladin (Me) to check the other.
> DM says cave is warm, not worried tough ass armor and mad strength, also only PC from start of campaign
>I got this
> Fuckin "small" dragon or some shit out of no where, grabs on to me and flys way the fuck high over actual army of Giants.
>No initiative roll, no reaction just ass rape.
> Try strength check, fucking 20 in str (pathfinder btw)
>Not dick happens.
> No way to break out.
>Dropped into army of Giants and has heroic last stand
>Dies...
>Party loses there muscle and a healer.
>Butthurt intensifies

At this point I begin to bargain with DM to save my PC, 2-3 other players had done the same way earlier in the same campaign.

>Less than 5 rounds after I'm "dead" party comes across magician kobald fucker.
>Wizard uses lighting bolt or some shit
>Kobald goes full Aluh Akbar, and blows up killing 3/4 of the rest of party.
>Party confused
>Party mad
>GM says he had a necklace of fireballs and the wizard should have known better...
>game ends everyone disappointed as a 1-2 year campaign is ground to a halt

Nothing gets me more salty than, YOUR DEAD, traps sprung by GM. Was an ok party with a min max here and an edge lord there but altogether my paladin kept us at least neutral and on track plot wise.

>>49571217
Sounds like the GM just wanted to be done with the campaign... Still, that's kind of a shitty way to go about it.

>Go on roll20
>Join game
>15 other players
>5 show up to the first session including me.
>Total shitfest. The GM didn't plan anything and two players already kill each other's characters.
>Politely tell GM I don't want to participate further
>Go online and binge watch gaming videos.

>>49571329
Jesus... 15? What do you do with 15 goddamn players? Just say "Here's my world, now go! Run amok" and see what happens?

>>49571208
That's fair, starting out kinda sucks.

>>49571217
Long campaigns end like that so many times it hurts.
Last mine was
>About to start 3rd act after 3 years
>We know who the bad guys are but not the real BBEG
>In some cave having a dream secuence with premonitory images
>My character decided to pass because he doesn't believe in destiny
>Thank god I passed because 3 of the BBEG lieutenants appear and if I were inside with them they'd have raped us while we were sleeping
>Scream for help
>In the meantime one of the lieutenants decides to have a 1vs1 against me over some old grudges
>He has a good roll in ini and goes first
>Not much damage but I have to roll against 12 due paralysis
>Piss easy I have 12 Fort
>Nat1
>Fuck
>Now I'm a hostage
>They use me to bargain for the macguffin
>They don't hold to their end of the bargain and attack my friends
>Me still paralized
>Group nat1s everytime
>Enemies nat20s everytime
>GM doesn't know what to do
>When I can act there're already two dead PCs
>Try my best and nova the shit out my resources
>Miss miss miss miss and miss
>Make like 10 attacks that all miss even though I have a 40% chances of hitting each one of them
>3rd PC dies
>Fuck, I'm out of here
>Due having speed 60 I leave enemies behind easily
>GM is pulling his hair because we lost the macguffing and 3/4 of the party
>Game dies

>Oh anon, your melee DPR char deals that much damage? that's not fair for the other non DPR chars, look at the poor Wizard, he doesn't deal that much damage, and don't tell me he doesn't use damage spells or anything, that's irrelevant, sorry, I'm removing Power Attack and your other feats it's the fair thing to do. What do you mean you want spells now? why should that be fair?

File: dramaturgy.jpg (61KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 640x480px

>my players and I have really hectic schedules because of our jobs and schedules
>I send them messages during the week to settle for a day to play
>I hardly get messages until it's thursday and such which is understandable given my friends have a hard time knowing if they'll be free by then
>except for one fucker that never answers
>he finished his career and he hasn't got a job nor anything, he only parties
>he tends to cancel us the same day because he would rather go to a party
>the other players would prefer to cancel as well since they don't want to continue the story without him
>he never tells us when he has free time to play
>when we confronted him about it, he told us that he doesn't tells us when he's free so that he can go to a party if it comes up
>"i want to fuck girls, man xddd"
>he parties 3 times a week. He's 25 and still a virgin.

I just need one stable player, one more fucking player and I'm kicking him out, but all my suggested players are vetoed by the rest of the party since they don't know them personally.

>>49571404
Its this kind of shit that really puts me off the philosophy that you can't fudge die rolls. While the fear of death is important to keeping tension, sometimes its more important to fudge it for the sake of the game.

>>49571475
Never invite to a game a guy who puts parties and shit like that over a game. We had a guy like that, the fucker even went with the "well, I want to spend my spare time in more important things", then why the fuck did you asked to enter in the game?!

>>49570756
Holy shit, are you autistic? They were subtly kicking you and didn't want to admit they were doing so.

>>49571508
He used to be a good player at first, he got really excited with the adventures and shit, but he suddenly got like this once we began playing a modern mystery campaign that's slower than your average fantasy campaign.

Which annoys me the most, is that we all do some huge sacrifices to play: One of my players is a doctor, another one lives in another city and the other one works to support his family. They all sacrifice their scarce free time to play, and this guy doesn't give a fuck about it.

>>49571404
>Party slaughter while losing the macguffin
Sounds like a perfect setup for 'Part 2: After The Bad Guys Fucked Everything Up' or something, wasted potential.

>>49571582
Not really, premonitory dreams were:
>You're the chosen one and a half celestial
>You're the chosen one and a half fiend
>You're the chosen and who cares
So the chosen ones died like bitches the moment they stepped out the cave, GM didn't expect that it seems

>>49570632
Honestly, if it's that abd where the rest of the group hates him, talk to them individually and try to get as many as you can into "It's us or him" situation.

Ideally get the whole group behind it. Bit of a dick move to the DM, but if one guy is really ruining it for everyone that badly....

>>49571641
>A world in which the 'chosen ones' couldn't do jack shit, the divine visions are lies, and now that evil reigns it's up to no-name nobodies to save the day
The unexpected is what roleplaying games are all about.

>>49570546
I've heard of people who had rando players, who would up stealing jewelry.

Just play somewhere else for a few sessions until she feels okay letting them into her place. You could even just go out for dinner and/or drinks with your new players to determine if they're the sort of people you could a) enjoy spending an evening with, or b) let into your home.

>>49571150
Molesters? What the fuck happened there?

>>49571707
>no name nobodies
Hey, my char is still alive... But that definition still fits, my char was the least Mary Sue of the group and avoided every shift t like that if possible

>>49570473
>Join Play by Post M&M villain game
>Setting pretty good
>evil campaign where everyone agreed not to be Chaotic Retarded dickbags(mostly)
>Make a superspeedster called Quick Fix. Supersmart tech guy, costume is bright colors with hot rod flame decals on it
>This is to throw off that he doesn't have super speed, he actually has time manipulation powers and just masquerades as a speedster.
>Game starts when someone blows up half of a Starbucks trying to rob it
>Get into fight with supercops, me and an actual speedster taking the fight literally all over the city
>Everyone's having some fun fight with super-police. Some lose and get captured, others win and help break out the others
>We eventually get pulled out of their by some secret organization
>Basically getting railroaded into saving the world from a time-travelling dictator
>Sure, ok, we can do it in dirty, underhanded ways, this can still be fun
>Get onto a plane, DM wants us to roleplay with each other
>We spend about a month of real-time going back and forth with roleplay
>DM wants to us to roleplay amongst ourselves more while waiting for the plane to reach it's destination
>We spend another week or two roleplaying, basically telling each other everything about ourselves short of our social security numbers and bank account details
>DM suddenly vanishes, game dies.

Almost a year ago and it still makes me mad. Game was fucking great till we got to the plane.

>>49571849
Shit*

>>49571860
Gatsu, is that you?

>Ask some friends if they want to play in a PbP game
>Ask if they could check in once every two-three days
>They all agree, nearly everyone has a free 15 minutes a day to make a post
>Get game set up on roll20, using the web application for world info, maps, and character sheets and the forum for actually playing
>Only one person makes a character
>Everyone else is too busy

Fuck me. Worse yet, I'm thinking of attempting it again (but with a different group). Just gotta figure out a good system for a Ryuutama but in space game.

>think my defense sucks for a melee role
>tell my GM I'm going to grab some stuff to increase my defense
>he says there's no need, that picking the best stuff is a dick move
>disagree about that isn't needed
>die before Rea hung next level because oh gee my defense actually sucked
And the GM still had the balls to tell me he wasn't going to let me pick the stuff to increase my defense

>>49571085
Shit man, I know that feel.

>DM for group to give usual DM a break
>All but one person makes interesting characters
>PCs have actual goals for me to plan around
>Usual DM gets bored because his character doesn't mesh with the party
>Dips out
>the 4 original members of the group cancel the game, leaving me and two other friends out
>they do this behind my back instead of talking to me like adults
>Are surprised when I'm reluctant to join any other games they play

I'd be okay if they said my DM style was wack or something, but they still talk about the game like they had fun. I wanna DM something in the future, but I'm honestly not sure if it's worth it.

File: 1473880309212.gif (621KB, 440x247px) Image search: [Google]

621KB, 440x247px

>>49570473

Most of this is PnP related, but I played 40k for the first time since 5th a little while ago.

I have never seen so many 1s in my life. I wanted to throw everything against the wall and never play again. It was so unbelievably frustrating. Meanwhile, my opponent is rolling like a God.

>>49570964
Ask someone to try and take over, man. If they can't, keep it running.

>>49572039
I used to get angry at my rolls, then decide to write down my rolls and make an excel to see the average, after 2000+ rolls turned out my two d20 have average rolls below 10.5, so I bought better ones. So far so good.

>>49572101

I might have to get new ones because they were sitting for so long, but I also used my opponents dice for a turn and still got fucked.

File: 1087166.png (120KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 480x640px

>not a Star Wars fan
>not a d20 fan
>get asked by group of Star Wars fans to run a Star Wars d20 game
>do it because I'm an idiot

Every plot thread I've tried to come up with stinks of KotOR II because I'm an edgy 40kid, and now my players are investigating their way through a Czerka plot involving Anzat hybrids and installing a set of Hutt puppet-crime lords. Had an argument between players over whether or not to shoot a Czerka agent or drop him naked in Tatooine's Dune Sea last session. This doesn't feel like Star Wars anymore.

>>49571217
>PF
>splitting the party
>thinking armor and strength will protect you from energy damage
You poor child

>>49570964
Take this from another STEM major. If your players are awesome, they'll understand that you need time to take care of your grades and future. If they don't understand, then they aren't as good of friends as you thought they were.

>>49571860
If only you had known...

>It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan.
>Crashing this plane with no survivors

Had a shit session last time. Players just weren't interested in much that you couldn't stick an axe in, and had immense trouble memorizing a sub20-page homebrew made for literal retards.

Two of my players (and close family) are always late, sometimes an hour and a half late while the rest of us sit there with thumbs up our asses.
One of my players values, loosely defined, dancing lessons higher than the game that everyone else agrees to and wastes precious free time.

We play once a week or less.
God I wish I could buy/rent good IRL players or something.

>>49572167
Know how to spot a bad GM?
See how he handles a party split.

>>49572425
What are the tell tale signs of a bad GM in those situations?

>>49572010
>he says there's no need, that picking the best stuff is a dick move
I totally get not wanting to start an optimisation-race at the table, but this kind of shit is just ridiculous

>>49572101
>being this OCD & analysis retentive

>>49572425
>>49572461
A good GM always punishes a party split.

File: 1385865987677.png (12KB, 629x425px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 629x425px

>>49572970
Most of the time you don't even need to punish a party split. Adventuring parties exist because adventuring alone is fucking dangerous

The only games I can get right now are DnD, and I don't even like DnD. It's pretty minor but aaauurrrrgh.

>>49572461
Does a good chunk of the session consist of sitting there, bored out of your mind, unable to participate because the GM hasn't gotten around to your character yet?

A good GM will juggle both narratives, tying them together in an interesting way and keeping both sides invested. A bad GM, like a bad juggler, will drop one group while they try to handle the other.

>>49573014
>Adventuring parties exist because adventuring alone is fucking dangerous

This. No matter how badass you think you are, you're just one bad roll away from falling to a ghoul's hug or a viper's poison. With some strong trustworthy buddies, your chance to survive increases a lot.

>>49573193
I WANT A DRUID ARCHETYPE THAT GETS AT-WILL WILDSHAPE FROM THE WIZARD'S FAMILIAR LIST FOR CHRISTMAS PLEASE

File: Wolfspace.jpg (355KB, 600x448px) Image search: [Google]

355KB, 600x448px

>>49573193
for christmas i want a friend that loves me

>>49572970
Not necessarily. Punishing the party split is more of a preventative measure. Telling multiple narratives at once while keeping all participants invested is extremely difficult, so punishing the party split is done to discourage future instances of it.

>>49573431
I mean, think of it this way. Dealing with a party split is like being asked to juggle. It looks damn impressive if you can do it, but if you fumble those juggling balls everywhere you're going to look like an idiot and end up with a disappointed audience.

So instead you pelt the audience with juggling balls as hard as you can and shout "THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU MAKE ME JUGGLE!"

Now I make it sound like this is a terrible way to handle it and indeed if the party gets TPKd the moment they split up it is, but with a little more subtlety the GM can drill it into their heads that they're better off sticking together without outright murdering everybody. For instance, having character A deal with a difficult fight that character B could have dealt with with ease, while character B tries to overcome an obstruction that character A's abilities would have easily bypassed.

File: m8.jpg (86KB, 570x720px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 570x720px

>>49572025
I resemble this story.

>Friends have never played D&D before, interested in trying it out.
>I agree to DM Pathfinder, as the only person with experience.
>Players invite a couple more people I didn't know.
>Fine with it, they're all cool folks.
>Walk them all through character creation, start off a session, the party gets caught up in underworld shenanigans and bands together to help each other escape.
>Start drawing from their backstories, tying elements into an overall plot and personal journeys for the characters.
>Game goes on for about a year, 3 party members have become the "driving force" for the party, the rest are more or less along for the ride.
>This is their choice, mind you, not something I forced on them.
>One of the core players has to drop because he's going abroad to teach for a few years.
>Alright, that's fine; I've planned ways that a few of the characters can drop if necessary.
>I'm also taking a month to study abroad, so I suggest using this as a natural intermission and suggest some other games for them to try out as a downtime game while I'm gone, and to keep on the back burner as an option in case we can't do the main game.
>Their game is still going when I get back, so I join in.
>Second core player seems enthusiastic at first, creates a character he loves playing who ends up being just as important to the second game's plot.
>Gradually becomes less attentive during games, playing Binding of Isaac during sessions, flaking on game nights more often than usual due to "not feeling it."
>Stops showing up altogether.
>Can't progress without him.
>Still gets excited about both of his characters and talks about how he misses playing them on Facebook.
>We're all confused because he's never expressed any objections to the games or given any concrete reason for quitting.
>Never leaves his house except when he's invited to parties, never hosts events despite frequently buying new games and talking about how hyped he is to them.
>???

>>49573760
Dude, that sounds like depression. Find out what's going on in his life. He needs some friends to drag him away from that. It's easy to get sucked in to staying home alone all the time and never leaving.

File: 1475044015690.png (1MB, 818x452px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 818x452px

>>49570473
>"Hey guys, how about I have a go as GM with a different system for a change?"
>Minimal response
>Instead all play Pathfinder with ForeverGm

>Finally get them to try something new and I get to try GMing
>ForeverGM acting as player for probably first time ever
>Proceeds to be as big a prick as possible and attempts to derail constantly

>Finally have enough (out of game) bullshit
>Cut off all contact
>Been without a game a very long time

Sucks because tabletops are probably my favorite hobby but considering I miss the games more than the people I hung out with I know I made the right choice.

>>49572167
Not splitting the party is for min maxing number crunchers, with little interest in story telling. And I spent the whole beginning of the game walking through doors first "Becouse you will survive" "your the paladin" "you can just heal yourself" and not a whole lot you can say when the party asks you to check because of previously stated reasons and to cover all the squishes from ambush
>>49571288
And the GM was really bummed after we stopped, even said on several occasions afterwards that I was one of the few people who he never had to worry about fucking the game up with shinaniguns (rouge stealing shit to often, and from party members to be an edge lord,and gimmick grapple monk who guess what only grappled shit and never did dick outside of combat, to name a few)

>>49571496
This

>>49573785
Yeah, that's about what most of us figured. A lot of this followed a rather nasty breakup between him and another player (she left the group on otherwise amiable terms) and he's always been prone to depressive behavior.

We've made a number of attempts to bring him along to other events since then, but he's been pretty flaky about attendance. That's made it hard for any of us to help, especially since a lot of us have started to hit points in our lives where we're getting responsibilities piling up and a shortage of cash to go out and do things often. It's a pretty rotten situation for all involved.

>>49574157
I guess the Butthurt has not subsided over the years, I just think splitting the party within a dungeon/encounter isn't the same as the wizard taking sessions off to make fuckton of items and conquer a city while the party is pushing the actual plot.

>a relatively long running campaign I'm GMing
>there have been a few issues early on, but whatever, one player left but everyone else is having fun
>people are starting to have scheduling issues, but whatever, I change a few things around so we can finish the campaign for once
>the last session never happens because I wanted everyone to be there for the finale

> last year
> DM of our six-man Pathfinder game is out of the country for most October
> I offer to run something else instead
> since it's October, I pitch a four-part Call of Cthulhu mini-campaign timed so that the last session is the night of the 31st
> everybody is onboard
> PF DM's flight is delayed so he gets to play in the first session
> two guys can't make it to first session because they're working late
> second session, one guy is working late again, second guy is radio silent
> third session, first guy is radio silent, second guy shows up an hour late
> second guy mentions offhandedly that he's joined a Pathfinder Society group that plays on our regular game day every other week
> second guy leaves halfway through the session
> last session, same two guys don't show up and don't even bother to give me an excuse

Well fuck you too, I guess

>>49572425
This.

>>49571404
Yet more proof that open rolling is shit.

Who'd have thought?

>>49572010
That kind of GM is the worst. Absolute garbage

>>49570473
My old group from a while ago were massive dicks about every new character Inintroduced. If I brought in any npc who had more personality than a stick or Who was not totally subservient to the party and their whims then they immediately accused me of making "another dmpc", and then immediately began plotting their demise. Admittedly they didnt follow through on their threats often but it was pissing annoying to have an npc, whom I had intended as someone interesting they could interact with for session after session, immediately written off, and all those interesting plotlines immediately reduced to "this person took more than 15 seconds to design, therefore they need to die".

>>49574086
>ForeverGM acting as player for probably first time ever
>Proceeds to be as big a prick as possible and attempts to derail constantly
That sounds like he was browsing /tg/. Lots of GMs confess that they suck as players and actively shit on any other GM attempting to run a game, when they are players in it.

I will never understand why they do it though.

>>49575020
As a DM, it can feel disempowering and even painful to watch someone do things the 'wrong' way, to the point where you want to force them to stop. Many DMs are used to dictating the game world, so sometimes it's hard to stop.
My advice to people who deal with this:
Play as often as you can, so that your default brain setting for a game doesn't switch to possessive.
When you do play for the first time in a while, sit down and contain your autism- ask yourself how someone else corrected you like you're planning on correcting this guy, and how you reacted to it.

>>49571496

Christ this current generation is a bunch of soft cunts for believing this tripe. Sometimes you lose. TPK happens, you fucking roll with it instead of wanting to cheat and casualize everything. How many participation ribbons did you "earn" while growing up?

>>49571358
It is possible. When I was in college, I was in a fairly large gaming group that focused on tabletop games, and every year, we'd have a "guild-wide" game where anyone and everyone could join in. These games would usually have around 20 players split into several groups, each with a separate GM. It took a lot of communication between players and GMs to make everything cohesive, but they were good games.

>get into """D&D""" in high school
>by that I mean GM has us briefly describe our characters and has basically everything determined by a single dice roll. Nothing much more than that since she doesn't want to deal with skills.
>disappointed, but this is literally the only opportunity to play anywhere nearby at the time so I roll with it
>girl who invited me to the group eats it all up because she's afraid of anything more in depth and laps up anything that comes out of GM's mouth
>should also mention GM is a girl and best friends with other girl
>offhandly mention one time at an unrelated hangout with girl who invited me that I wish our gane was a little more in depth
>she gets super fucking pissed and says how dare I for disrespecting GM and she walks out mad as fuck
>lol okay whatever
>not invited back to a session
>pretty sure half of the players there weren't at the next sessions anyway
>honestly not even sure if there was a next session, wasn't like there was a story or anything
LOL WOMEN RIGHT?
fuck me...

>new edition of a game I ran in college coming out soon, revives good memories.
>scrape together a group online with the intention to switch to the new rules when they are released.
>want to run low power game using old rules, players all want high power game using transition rules.
>run module I have always wanted to run, set in a real city I have never been to.
>the three good players are from that city and correct my mistakes in private.
>one player cheats and only cares about winning, game was pitxhed as social-heavy.
>one bad player drives out a good player, but the rest of the group asks me not to kick him.
>get convinced, think I can endure it and salvage the game.
>a year passes. Lots of good story from player interaction, lots of bad player sitting things up.
>change job, compromise on new schedule. Struggle with game schedule.
>find out all the players are better, more successful people than me.
>new edition comes out, planning on switching to new version and finally kicking bad player.
>bad player makes me furious during a session that ran 3 hours over time.
>put game on hold, read new rules. Can't make sense of them.
>realize I just wanted a game with friends, like the original game in college.
>realize I can't wing it anymore.
>haven't talked to group in a year.
>wonder if they would still want to continue.
>tbeyowowoohebgamehi

>>49575398
What game was it?

>>49575406
nWoD Mage.

If my players are reading this, please know that I'm sorry it turned out this way.

>>49574954
Very few GMs can hiden rolls well
I caught some on a fib helping enemies so many times

>>49575460
>I caught DMs fudging
And?
Good DMs fudge for player enjoyment.
And before you saynit, no, not for easy mode.

>>49572482
It was optimization (anything that lets you survive in games is optimization), sure, but it wasn't outside my character's possibilities to get those benefits neither it was blatantly powergaming. Also it was pretty need as proven by the game, enemies were hitting me with more than a 50% chance, and the moment we faced something slightly above our normal, boom, brutalized in 1 turn with 6 attacks that all hit.

>>49575460
>Very few GMs can hide rolls well
There are as many good GMs as there are good players, proportionally speaking.

Thought it's been my experience that it helps when I don't walk out on GMs that tell me explicitly that they will be hiding rolls/rolling behind the GM screen, to find good GMs who fudge rolls.

Of course, most good GMs can hide rolls well and make the players feel genuinely challenged by the encounters that they face, if said encounter is supposed to be hard of course.

Open rolling is good for oneshots, or high-lethality games. Any game where the players don't have to waste half an hour coming up with a new character concept and another half hour to make a character sheet. Where they don't have to feel invested in their character, where death is a regular occurrence that doesn't have much emotional impact.

Some people like that, and that's fine. Others prefer deeper, more meaningful games.

>>49575476
>Playing Anima
>Enemy is butchering us but we are still alive
>Spend a couple of turns studying him, all possible stamina, all possible ki, using a feature that increses both my crits and crit fails but spending resource I can repeat the roll, everything I got to make the best hit I can while hidding plus behind him (maluses to his defense)
>Roll several open rolls (basially if you roll 91+ on d100 you roll again and add that to the overall roll, you keep doing this as long as you keep rolling 92+ on the second roll, 93+ on the third, 94+ on the fourth and so on)
>Total on the roll around 450+, plus my static bonuses to hit, highest roll we ever saw in the game, rolled d100 like 6 times
>Other players are cheering like crazy
>GM is stunned at the vision of what just happened
>GM "Ok..."
>DM rolls to defend
>Rolls one die...1 die
>He has two d10 (to simulate d100) but he rolls only one
>Pause
>Rest of the players have a wtf? face
>GM "He parries your attack and gets a counter attack"
>"No?" face on every player on the table
>Counter attack is when you surpass attacker's roll by a certain number
>Me with double wtf? face "how?..."
>GM "Roll defense"
>Me "How?"
>GM "Just roll defense"
>Roll: 67 plus static bonus of 150 = 217
>He still has maluses because I'm hidden and he didn't even roll perception
>GM "He hits you"
>Literally nobody in the table believe that bs because he had to roll above my 450+217+50 with only 1d10
>My character is beheaded, that means he actually rolled above 1000+ with one d10 even assuming he has the max static attack bonus in the game
For player enjoyment, sure. And this is just one of the many situations that make me distrust GMs who fudge rolls

In fact, game has tables to determine difference between attack and defense and stuff like that, the number he rolled doesn't even exist in there

I didn't return for the next session, and later heard nether did the rest of the players for the session after the one I skipped

>>49575476
It would be a fucking shame if your players hate that sort of thing though.

Like that one time I figured that my GM wouldn't let my character have anything bad happen to him, resulting in me getting unfathomably bored with the game.

>>49575619
>Implying all fudging means no harm
Fuck this meme.
You had a bad DM who fudged and made you bored.
Not all fudging means going easy on players for fucks sake.

>>49575606
Anima actually uses formulae to work out damage stuff, they just only appear in Core Exxet and Arcana Exxet. They give the table when you work them out for that range.

>>49575629

>implying the alternative is good
May I direct you to this good anon?
>>49575606

>>49575644
>Here's an example of a bad DM
>Therefore the GM tool of fudging is inherently wrong
Sure.

>>49575606
Not the guy you're replying to but man, that GM sucked.

He would've sucked even more with open rolling, but I can tell you right now that even if that did really happen, he was a shit GM.

Good GMs who fudge the dice wouldn't automatically kill your character like that.
Hell, most GMs would probably allow you to kill the main villain in one with with a roll like that.

By the way, the probability of you having that roll is 0,00001512% which makes me wonder if what you described really happened.

>>49575619
Not the guy you are replying to but
>Like that one time I figured that my GM wouldn't let my character have anything bad happen to him
This is bad GMing. The GM is using a tool that should make the game more enjoyable, making it shittier instead.

A good GM would fudge dice in a situation where the game actually benefits from it.

>>49575683
>0,00001512%
What roll? his? there wasn't a roll, he rolled 1d10 just to make us believe he actually rolled, he just came up with "no, this is a counter attack so high it's going to kill you" with no rolls involved.

Again, he had to roll several times, first has to be 91+, if he rolls that he rolls once more, if he rolls in that second roll 92+, he rolls once more, rinse and repeat. He rolled just once.

I rolled like 5 times, I had to use a calculator to add up every bonus, roll, and everything, He did it on the fly in 1 second, and he isn't a human calculator, I saw him struggle when paying his part of the dinner.

There was no chance, he just said no and rolled a die to fool us, he didn't even do that well. I don't like rolling behind the screen since then, it won't make me bail out from a game but I'll spend time distrusting the rolls and that removes part of the enjoyment on the game. It's sad, I know, but bad experiences do that.

Btw, that Anima story wasn't the only one of "fudging for fun" I have.

>>49575255
What are you doing acting as if roleplaying games are somehow a challenge to be overcome? They're entertainment. "Winning" the campaign isn't actually an accomplishment, despite what you might like to think. Don't act as if you're older than the average poster, either. It makes you look like a sad cunt.

>>49575739
>What roll?
Your roll for exploding dice. That's a 0,00001512% probability of happening. 1 in 15.120.000

> I don't like rolling behind the screen since then, it won't make me bail out from a game but I'll spend time distrusting the rolls and that removes part of the enjoyment on the game.
Well, you had a shit GM who abused fudging rolls to railroad your character's death.

That sucks, I agree.

And if you would rather have your character get stabbed to death by a first level half-orc who got a lucky crit on your level 3 wizard, then that's fine by me.

>>49575739
>One DM used this thing badly
>Therefore its always bad
One time I ate a jam donut with no jam.
Therefore all jam donuts have been unfilled.

One guy who played D&D killed someone.
Therefore all RPGs should be banned.

One time my DM was bad.
Therefore all DMs are bad.

He was a shit, no doubt. But you are being irrational.

>>49575676
My apologies for not being up for playing a shitty theatre rehearsal. Learn how to work around the randomness of the game instead of scripting the story and then try sounding smug and superior.

>>49575746
I'm sorry to hear you've never played with a decent GM.

>>49575255
>Sometimes you lose
I agree, sometimes you lose

>TPK happens, you fucking roll with it instead of wanting to cheat and casualize everything.
It begs the question if the GM wants to completely trash the campaign and start over from scratch. There's also the thing with the 'revolving door' party composition: how invested are you going to be in the game if you have to make a new character every two sessions because you get your PC killed every couple of weeks?

In some games it works (see: Only War) in others, less so.

>>49575807
>All fudging is bad and means a railroad
Nope.

File: 1471252150792.jpg (220KB, 753x887px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 753x887px

>>49575808
>I'm sorry you're having fun
Thats okay, I'll do my thing and you can keep drawing your sense of accomplishment and self-worth from imaginary dice games.

>>49573747
That just sends the message that they should have gone in different directions when they split

File: left.jpg (11KB, 500x370px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 500x370px

>>49575823
>Fudging doesn't mean railroad.
>Intentionally altering the result of an encounter and being put on the "proper" track isn't railroading.
Are you damaged?

>>49575849
No, you are.
Because fudging rolls isn't exclusively used for that you retard. Have you never GMed?

>>49572143
>Implying Reservoir Akk Dogs isn't awesome

>>49575849
That's not fudging dice rolls, that's actually railroading.

Fudging is allowing the fun of the game to override the roll of a die that would inflict misery on the players and reduce dramatic playtime in favor of a shitty death or a stupid situation making the game less fun.

The fact that you can't differentiate means you should never, ever GM for anyone.

File: 1473418960461.png (957KB, 1298x710px) Image search: [Google]

957KB, 1298x710px

>>49570473
>Been trying to get a game for months
>first one died before I even signed up because DM decided to do some weird living world game version of DnD with the idea of everyone can be the DM
>second one died because DM got cold feet and decided he needed to perfect his story or something
>third one was stilborn and never got off the ground because the scope was too large
>fourth one was nice and small scope, simple ideas and nice variety
>turns out DM wants to draw his maps
>4 months later still nothing
I don't think I'll ever get to play a game, online or local. To make things worse, I was related to two of those DMs.

>>49570546
So introduce them to her beforehand, and meet them somewhere for coffee or the like, with her, so she DOES know them.
It's pretty simple.

>>49575782
One, more than one, anon, stay on the conversation, I've only bad experiences from fudging rolls, only once saw it been made in a good form, rest all bad experiences

>>49576118
You only said once, retard.

>>49576141
Can you even read?

>Btw, that Anima story wasn't the only one of "fudging for fun" I have.

>>49576118
So?
The fact you only ever had bad experiences of it doesn't mean its inherently bad, you legit autismal.

>>49576149
Nobody is going to read your blog till the last sentence.

>>49575977
Quitters don't find games.

>run campaign
>DM I want to run this gimmick build
>yeah, sure, whatever makes you happy, just stick to the rules
>5 sessions in
>oh shit, my gimmick build isn't working out the way I expected, I want to roll a new character

Just make characters that work, goddamnit. I'm the DM, you can just come to me and we can see if we can give you some allowances. Not that I give two fucks, because your characters was a paper-thin Chaotic Evil murderhobo, and your second one wasn't much different, so I was glad to see them go. But fuck me, is it so damn hard to make a character who isn't completely useless outside of one very narrow context?

>>49576159
>>49576163
While I agree that fudging, when done well, is lightyears better than open-rolling, there is no need to start insulting one another, fellow fa/tg/uys

>>49576159
I didn't say is inherently bad, please post where do I say that. I said that it makes me distrust the GM, I don't complain or bail out, but makes me make mental calculations to see if he's cheating to have us controlled and that removes part of the fun in the game. Again, stay on the conversation and stop strawmaning

>>49576163
If you're not going to read a post, you shouldn't make-up bullshit relating to it, retard. Kill yourself to improve the genepool.

>>49575871
I have. And I never fudge, because I'm not a goddamn pussy.

>>49576188
>please post where i say that
Like I'm going to reread your blog.

>forces rolled stats
>complains and forces LA if someone rolls above elite array

>>49576205
>people who like fudging are genuinely this retarded

Not surprising, really.

>>49576198
>In don't use this tool, because its always used wrong
So use it right, dumbass.

File: ggosh.png (163KB, 400x798px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 400x798px

>>49570473
>Be pretty decent writer
>Usually a loudmouth in conversation
>Want to gm a game
>Stutter when put on the spot
>Try and work this out as a player
>Still sound very awkward and forced.
>Talk normally OOC
>Finally give up and play dark, brooding characters to work around my issue.
It's like every time I try and roleplay, my outgoing personality is immediately switched with a gibbering autist.
I am just stumped really.

>>49576235
It's a shitty tool. There's no right way to use it, dumbass.

>>49570473
>join a sci-fi exploration game
>GM comes to game with "our new GM"
>new GM doesn't like space exploration
>cyberpunk instead
>nobody knows the setting
>his explanation makes it sound standard grimderp
>"you will all be essentialy shadowrunners"

And thus ends my 3rd gameless month and starts the 4th.

You have to be top tier experienced GM to fudge, you're the GM you should be impartial and fair, fudging removes part of that, unless you are very experienced you're gonna fuck up, and the great majority aren't that good nor that experienced

I feel like everyone's imagination has been completely cartoonified. No one plays fantasy straight. It is always done through some layer of irony.

>>49576235

This >>49576243
Fudging is a tool of a shit GM. Creating an interesting situation out of a bad roll is what a good GM does.
But no, why don't you give me another smug one worded reply? With anime girl this time, please.

File: image_0.jpg (25KB, 394x458px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 394x458px

>>49576269
Not him, but have a smug Pepe on the house.

>>49576269
What interesting situation arises out of a TPK?

>>49576269
>One worded
Learn to count maybe?
Uguu.
Tell you what.
Start a new thread.
See how much you get fucking chewed oiut for being a dumb cunt that doesn't understand the difference between fudging and a railroad.
I fucking dare you.

>>49571110
>Anon, I don't have time for a weekly session
>Yeah, I've got other stuff to do
>Maybe we can run biweekly games
>That's cool, guys, but can we play in the evening instead of in the afternoon, this time?
>uuuhhhh, but in the evening we're all on the chat playing videogames

Fuck me, why does playing an RPG translate to "effort", but playing Overwatch every single fucking night for multiple hours to the point where I don't even really speak to you guys anymore because you're all too busy with in-game banter does not? At this point I don't even want to buy the game anymore because how utterly I loathe that it's become my friends' #1 addiction. But getting a bunch of people together for Magicka or Rocket League is like pulling teeth. Let alone PnP games.

>>49576243
Not him, but fudging is superior to open rolling for quite a few reasons.

Mostly, it avoids pointless player deaths.
>inb4 "just suck it up, pussy"
Some players make genuinely interesting characters, with a good party dynamic and an interesting personality. They also make their character grow throughout the game, along with their buddies and other NPCs, maybe even the villains. It detracts from the fun of the game if every month the party changes setup because one or two characters die in an uneventful fight.

I like death to be meaningful, to have an impact on the characters who are still alive, not something that you grow used to because you are unlucky with a few saves and bleed out when a wolf trips and ganks you.

Another thing it does, is it gives the players a sense of challenge: there is few things more disappointing than when you finally reach the super-hyped villain, the guy the party has been itching to fight since fifty sessions. They are finally in his lair and... the wizard kills him with one spell because the guy got a low roll on a save.
Now that's disappointing!

Fudging dice is all about making the game more enjoyable for the whole group, to balance out supposedly hard encounters when the players are curbstomping the enemy and to make it so that the whole group isn't TPKd by a random encounter because they were unlucky.

If you don't like a good narrative, with a well thought-out plot and good character development and just want to roll dice and get kills, yeah, I agree: fudging might not be so great. Open rolling is great for one-shots and games that can go absolutely off the rails in a glorious trainwreck.

>>49570473
I'm running a game on IRC. Or rather, I'm trying to. The dicebot's been in and out all week, and hasn't been seen since yesterday.
Looks like it's another roleplaying session this week if things don't sort themselves out, or I use the emergency dicebot

>>49570473
>Want to play story-driven game focused on character progression.
>Have only one group avaliable in my place.
>One particular player keep picking fights with everyone including other players because it's easier to kill than to argue.
>Need to focus on defending myself from a murderhobo instead of character progression.
>Can't leave because I like story too much.

>>49576280
Gracie

>>49576283
None, but if you can't think of a good comeback session where the party comes back, then you shouldn't be GMing. Fighting out of hell, trying to break the spell the necro that raised them used to bind them, a groundhog day situation, all of these can be used to save what could be a lame TPK. "Ugggggh, no it didn't happen" is a bad way to go about it.

>>49576291
No anon, you are the shit GMs

>>49576339
>None, but if you can't think of a good comeback session where the party comes back, then you shouldn't be GMing. Fighting out of hell, trying to break the spell the necro that raised them used to bind them, a groundhog day situation
The first two only apply to fantasy, and the last one isn't any different from just saying it didn't happen. I mean, if the party comes back, then where is the risk at all? You might as well have just fudged the die in the first place if their deaths just mean they just to smack some demons around for a bit before they get back to what they were doing before.

>>49570473
> Join good group
> 2 Players altogether too nice
> Invite *everybody* to play
> Most recurring attendees are garbageplayers of various types: my-guy powergamers; people who don't read the rules and complain when you call them out; guy who ERPs at 5PM in an open store.
> Soon there are 11 people at the table one night
> I politely say I won't be making it anymore

>>49576283
>What interesting situation arises out of a TPK?

If the only failure state for losing a combat you can think of is TPK, you either need to accept that TPKs are going to happen and build the game accordingly, or seriously rethink your approach.

>>49576339
>I won't make a new thread because I know I'm wrong and just shitposting
OK.

>>49571404
That's not bullshittery, though. That's a climactic battle that goes completely wrong for the PC's.

This shit can happen. It's the risk of the game. The GM should have some sort of idea of what to do when this happens, even if it is "game over". Or, as others said, a follow-up campaign in the same world where the bad guy won. I mean, the bad guy DOES have a plan, right? he DOES have a reason to do what he's doing? And it's also on the players: It sounds like everyone just fought to the death because "that's what you're supposed to do".

The unexpected can happen in RPG's. It's one of their defining traits. If the GM puts up something like a MacGuffin, he should also have some sort of backup plan for what happens when the players fail. At the base level there's just a straight progression of the bad guy's plan. A series of actions that prepare him for the finale, that the players can influence, and carry non-lethal consequences. In-story, the bad guy wants to take this city because it provides an excellent springboard for his forces. That won't make him mechanically weaker or stronger in the final act, but if he succeeds the players DO lose a city where they may have contacts, where they can buy things, etc. And now they have to operate from a city that's a week's ride away.

>>49576381
>not giving into your sperg rage is shitposting
>one worded response
k

>>49576376
He was using it as the worst possible outcome of refusing to ever fudge.

>>49570473
>Tfw you have worked out most of the kinks with your group.
>The most annoying thing I have to deal with is a couple of players furiously searching their rulebooks to try to contest every call I make.
>90% of the time they end up saying nothing.
>The other 10% is enough to get on my nerves but it's definitely not a huge deal

Only other problem is that none of them seem to have any concept of role playing despite being INFATUATED with their PCs. This makes it super hard to build a story around them because they constantly reject it because it doesn't suit their metagaming

>>49576419
>Anything not a green word isn't a word
>Retard. Enjoy my zero word response.

>>49576309
>Fudging dice is all about making the game more enjoyable for the whole group, to balance out supposedly hard encounters when the players are curbstomping the enemy and to make it so that the whole group isn't TPKd by a random encounter because they were unlucky.

And that's the entire problem with fudging in a nutshell. There's no challenge, because the PCs could do anything short of cutting their own throats and they'll still win because the GM decides they should win. They don't win because of anything they did, they don't win because they got lucky at the last moment, they don't get to feel awesome for steamrolling an enemy that was supposed to be a challenge, they don't need to pull out their A-game because they're rolling badly... They might as well not be there.

>>49576459
>The problem with fudging is when I willingly misinterpret what is said.

>>49576474
All it takes is one time where the players figure out that you're not going to let them die to some random goblins, and the magic is gone.

>>49576491
>Then only way to have fun is if random goblins can kill you
What...?

>>49576459
Yeah, you need to never ever run a game.

>>49576520
Sorry for not being a terrible GM, I guess.

>>49576459
You're assuming that fudging dice means that you must always do it.
A good GM will only fudge a roll if it is necessary.
>BBEG failing a will save in the middle of combat
>A player failing to set up camp in a place they frequent
>A player/npc scoring a hit, but dealing 0 damage due to AC or whatever.
It's the same reason most DMs never use the "confirm crit" rule, it makes for a more enjoyable narrative experience.

>>49576518
>The problem with not fudging is when I willingly misinterpret what is said.

>>49576459
I agree with you that plot armor is absolutely stupid and shouldn't be done.

Here is what not to do
>Player, thinking he has plot armor: "I jump off the cliff."
>GM, giving the player plot armor: "You fall into a soft bale of feathers conveniently placed there"
A good GM would let PCs die when they do something stupid. I totally agree with that: if you do something stupid, you deserve Everything bad that is going to happen to you. There will not be any plot armor to save you if you decide to insult the barbarian king to his face after he has you all prisoners.

>There's no challenge
I feel like a bit rustled now, because it seems that you don't really pay attention to what I'm writing or selectively ignore it.
GMs _can_ fudge the dice to make an encounter _harder_ because the players are swimming in 20s like uncle Scrooge is swimming in money. Not only can he fudge rolls, but he can also assign more HP to the monster on the fly, in order for it to be tougher than before so that it's more of a challenge. Because this particular monster would otherwise be a disappointing fight for the party, who was totally hyped about a hard-ass fight coming their way.

Another problem with open rolling, which can even be seen from what you say is this:
>they don't get to feel awesome for steamrolling an enemy
>they don't need to pull out their A-game
It encourages powergaming like crazy. Every PC will just be min-maxed to hell and back, because they know that if they don't they might get critted by a critter and bleed out in a heap of shit in some random encounter. And they will breeze through encounters just like that, if they powergame, and ask themselves "where is all the challenge?"

>>49576459
I notice you actually ignore the one post that proves you don't understand what fudging is and why it isn't necessarily bad.

Now you're just trolling, badly.

Why are you playing systems that allow for random deaths if you don't want random deaths?

>>49576554
He's already ignored the only important post.

>>49575896

States pretty clearly the difference between railroading and fudging. But that's the one post he can't reply to because he wants his (You).

He's done this before, trolling for fun.

>>49576459
>I don't know what dramatic tension is or how to use it to increase fun my players are having
See, you're not a storyteller or game master, you're a computer. If the players can rely on perfect impartiality then they're better off playing an MMORPG or CRPG.

>>49576595
Why are we playing football if there is a real risk of breaking our foot or hurting ourselves?

>>49576621
Yes, if I'm playing football I'm accepting the risk that I might get hurt.

Why can't you accept the risks of the game you're signing up for instead of finding a more suitable game?

>>49576534
Hell, I almost forgot.
Fudging is even supported in RAW by means of "taking 20" or defaulting on a skill.

>>49576554
>GMs _can_ fudge the dice to make an encounter _harder_ because the players are swimming in 20s like uncle Scrooge is swimming in money. Not only can he fudge rolls, but he can also assign more HP to the monster on the fly, in order for it to be tougher than before so that it's more of a challenge. Because this particular monster would otherwise be a disappointing fight for the party, who was totally hyped about a hard-ass fight coming their way.
There's no challenge because whether they win or lose is solely the GM's decision. It's not based on anything the players do, it's not based on luck, it depends solely on whether the GM decides they should win. If the encounter is meant to be hard, that just means they'll have to spend more spells and more HP and the GM might decide to kill some of them if he feels it's dramatically appropriate. Not that it's actually hard: they still win because the GM decided they'll win(or lose because the GM decided they'll lose). Yeah, sure, the GM might decide to alter his decision if the players come up with something he thinks is particularly clever(or stupid), but that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with whether it's ACTUALLY clever or stupid.

>>49576661
>Fudging is even supported in RAW by means of "taking 20" or defaulting on a skill.

You fundamentally misunderstand what fudging means. Using the rules as intended is the exact opposite of fudging.

>>49576677
Yeah, but they are essentially the same thing.
The only difference is one has a convoluted requirement, and the other is at the GM's digression.

>>49576534
>>49576661
>Confirm crit
>taking 20
Oh, 3.5/PF. I can see why you'd need fudging to have any semblance of fun.

>>49576664
You do realise you missed the key word?
Was that deliberate?

>>49576689
No, they're the exact opposites. Taking 20 is not fudging, it's just a shorthand of "I'll roll until I succeed since we're not under time pressure and there's no penalty for failure."

>>49576700
It's irrelevant to my point.

>>49576661
taking 20 only happens on non stressful situations in where a failure is meaningless. Take 10 only happens on non stressful situations in where a failure is going to fuck up. If the situation is stressful you have to roll d20.

So if it's literally meaningless, yess, you can take 20 or 10, but you can't during combats or life or death situations.

>>49576730
So you deliberately ignored the crux of his point.
You're just trolling.

>>49576664
>There's no challenge because whether they win or lose is solely the GM's decision.
As is the decision of the GM to have the party face a certain monster in the first place.
>It's not based on anything the players do, it's not based on luck, it depends solely on whether the GM decides they should win.
Open rolling is also not based on anything the players do, but solely on luck. Usually the GM has a better picture of what is fun than RNGesus.
>and the GM might decide to kill some of them if he feels it's dramatically appropriate.
Dramatically, narratively and thematically. A GM might also decide to let the dice fall where they may, with only gentle nudges: a player character might die in a hard encounter purely because of dice, while another might barely make it so he can bleed out in the next few rounds with some good last words for the party.
>Not that it's actually hard: they still win because the GM decided they'll win(or lose because the GM decided they'll lose).
If the GM is good at fudging dice, the players won't notice, nor will they care. They will do their damndest to kill the enemy and in the end they will remember that fight for what it was: hard and rewarding when that son of a bitch villain finally bit the dust.

In conclusion, fudging dice is a better system than open rolling, because it lets the GM direct his world better than pure RNG. It takes, of course, a good GM to fudge dice correctly so that it has a very good impact on the game.
Open rolling, in the meantime, is the more lazy way of going about things, because the GM doesn't have to bluff his players or have a particularly good narrative prepared for the players to have a little bit of fun.

>>49570908

D&D to GURPS?

>>49576769
>Open rolling is also not based on anything the players do, but solely on luck. Usually the GM has a better picture of what is fun than RNGesus.
No, but it does mean the players' decisions won't be completely meaningless. Which alone makes it more fun than fudging.
>Dramatically, narratively and thematically. A GM might also decide to let the dice fall where they may, with only gentle nudges: a player character might die in a hard encounter purely because of dice, while another might barely make it so he can bleed out in the next few rounds with some good last words for the party.
Once fudging is on the table, that's no different from the GM deciding to kill him: when fudging is on the table, the dice only matter as much as the GM wants them to, and thus don't matter at all.

>Open rolling, in the meantime, is the more lazy way of going about things, because the GM doesn't have to bluff his players or have a particularly good narrative prepared for the players to have a little bit of fun.
Not lying to the players "for their own good" is what makes open rolling the better choice. Your players are, hopefully, adults and not small children and thus shouldn't be lied to just because you think you know better than they do.

>>49574086
>>49575020
Those are probably factors, but he had a huge ego problem among other insecurities so I think he was afraid of someone else doing better than him. Hard to tell though because he was such an ass out of game as well so don't give the guy too much credit.

>>49576769
>If the GM is good at fudging dice, the players won't notice, nor will they care. They will do their damndest to kill the enemy and in the end they will remember that fight for what it was: hard and rewarding when that son of a bitch villain finally bit the dust.
You mean for what is WASN'T. It being hard was just an illusion created by an arrogant GM.

>>49576237
This is pretty bog-standard performance anxiety anon. Try taking a public speaking or acting class at the local community college, it should help immensely.

>>49576826
And here we see the stupidity of someone who doesn't understand what 'fun' means.
>you have unlucky dice?
>not my problem
>you fail every skill check I make for you?
>not my problem
>your build is sub optimial?
>not my problem
>you can't survive because my math was wrong?
>not my problem
>hey, why aren't you playing anymore? Isn't this fun?

>>49576852
>I'm a terrible GM who can't figure out how to solve problems if I can't fudge them away

Ok.

>>49576812
>No, but it does mean the players' decisions won't be completely meaningless. Which alone makes it more fun than fudging.
I think I'm missing something here. Please tell me how the player's decisions are meaningless when the GM lets the players do exactly what they want to.
Example:
>Players: "Okay, we go to the King to bring back his daughter we saved from those kidnappers"
>GM: "The king is really grateful and wants to give you titles and land for your services."
>Players: Hm... we could be nobles... or "We ask for the biggest warship he has instead: we offer our services to him as privateers of his navy"
>GM: "Okay, the king lets you have the ship and declares you officers of the navy"
>Players: YES! WE BE PIRATES NOW!
If the players decide to become sanctioned pirates instead of nobles, they can. The GM will let them be what they want.

What I want to say with this:
It is not really a player decision, to die to a miserable dire wolf or not. It's either a) up to the dice or b) up to the GM. If the GM is good, he will know what is best for the group.

>Once fudging is on the table, that's no different from the GM deciding to kill him: when fudging is on the table, the dice only matter as much as the GM wants them to, and thus don't matter at all.
Yes, and?

>Not lying to the players "for their own good" is what makes open rolling the better choice.
We have different tastes, it seems: my players enjoy character advancement, interaction and interacting with the world in a meaningful way more than racking up kills in random encounters. They like it when the plot meshes with their backgrounds and character motivations and they get the chance to further the story with their own touch.

>>49576904
>We have different tastes, it seems: my players enjoy character advancement, interaction and interacting with the world in a meaningful way more than racking up kills in random encounters. They like it when the plot meshes with their backgrounds and character motivations and they get the chance to further the story with their own touch.

So do mine, and they get to enjoy making meaningful mechanical choices about their characters as well.

>>49576826
>You mean for what is WASN'T. It being hard was just an illusion created by an arrogant GM.
If you are lucky, you won't have to fudge the dice. Hopefully you are a good enough GM to make a monster that is challenging for the players. However, if the monster is rolling shit the whole time and the players expected and hoped for a hard encounter, they will understandably be pretty disappointed.

Think about it this way:

It's boss fight time, and I come out swinging with my big bad creature. There are two ends to the spectrum if I play by the dice:

>HIGH: Holy shit stop the game we're going to the casino now
The party just gets wasted, may even be a total wipe. If we're midway through the campaign, it's likely that this campaign is now over. I just BFG900'd a bunch of characters that the players enjoyed, and ruined the game as a result.

>LOW: Oh wow I can't fucking roll above a 5
The players go apeshit on my awesome creature which was supposed to give them a good fight. Suddenly they're not interested anymore because it's boring. It was too easy, and they didn't enjoy it.

The goal is to keep it somewhere in the middle. Your Big Bad should hit with most of his spells/attacks, but you know what? He should miss too. The players need that. It creates tension, because it shows that while the monster is big and powerful, it is still mortal and can miss. It makes the players feel good.

Consequently, the players need to know that if they don't play their cards right, their shit is rightfully fucked. But if the campaign is too hard, then nobody will want you to DM because you're just being a dick. Nobody spends upwards of an hour making a character to have that character die like a bitch. So you have to make things challenging to maintain tension, but not hopeless.

It just comes down to using your judgement.

Wednesday night, my LGS has another night for MTG and poker. I decided to play EDH.

>Cousin on GW reanimation
>T, playing Niv Mizzet wheels.deck
>Jay on Oloro pillow fort and control
And finally
>I'm playing Mogis.
>Oloro dumps 4 mana rocks on turn one, then follows with a rule of law so our game started at a screeching halt.
>We durdle until turn 6, where Niv wheels.
>Jay was salted by one wheel.
>My turn I get enough mana to hit him with rakdos return to make him dump his hand and go down to 65 life
>He then scoops, mad at me for doing that
>I told him I only did it because he's making the game a screeching halt with 3 tax effects and I wanna remove any opportunities for more
>Packs his shit up and drives home grumpily immediately after

Have you ever just blew someone out to where they left a store? Was I an asshole for targeting the control player with the discard spell?

>>49576890
But you can't fix any of those problems by using the dice, anon. That's the issue. You have to fudge those problems in some manner, or you have to force the player to recreate his character to fit your perfect world. Which is another form of fudging that is called 'railroading'.

I really fucking hate Paladins and there is always one guy in my group who plays one. I wish my DM would ban that class, they are too lawful good bound.

>>49576917
>So do mine, and they get to enjoy making meaningful mechanical choices about their characters as well.
Well, that's good: mine also enjoy it.

You know why? Because the secret to fudging well is to fudge as little as possible.
You seem to think that fudging dice means that the GM will _always_ regardless of how the dice is going, change the outcome of the result. Which is not the case, if he is GMing correctly.

>>49576339
>none
top fucking jej
at least try to back your point up
>a groundhog day situation
nothing worse than a DM that says 'iT WAS ALL A DREAM'
also i don't see how going 'but you're still alive' the next session isn't any different to what you're making fudging out to be - you're still using the 'baby padding' to make sure your campaign isn't just over then and there

>>49576924
>you have unlucky dice?
Here, you can borrow mine.
>your build is sub optimial?
You think your character isn't doing well because your build is bad? Sure, I'll let you respec. Do you want help?
Or you know, maybe they'll find just the magic item needed to buff that character in the treasure, or being sold cheap. Suspiciously cheap, even...
>you can't survive because my math was wrong?
Admittedly this is trickier. Some fights are hard, and the players can't win in a straight-up fight. Maybe they can find a way to run away and if need be, come back later when they're better prepared. Maybe the enemy doesn't need to kill them to accomplish what it wants. If worst comes to worst, I could even say something along the lines of "Sorry guys, looks like I fucked up the math. Give me five minutes to figure it out and then we'll rewind to the beginning of the fight."

If I need to fudge rolls for the game to be fun, then it's not a fun game in the first place.

>>49577005
>Give me five minutes to figure it out and then we'll rewind to the beginning of the fight.
Way to totally ruin an experience and absolutely break any immersion they had. Unless you play with a bunch of people who suffer OCD and Aspergers, this is the worst way to cope with a fight going badly.

>>49577005
>"Sorry guys, looks like I fucked up the math. Give me five minutes to figure it out and then we'll rewind to the beginning of the fight."
Not him, but there's few things I find more disappointing than a retcon. I mean, we just wasted, what, 40, 60 minutes getting killed by this creature only to do it all over again?

What is this, Skyrim?

>>49577029
I did say that's the worst case scenario, and definitely not optimal way to handle the situation. But it's still better than fudging if you can't come up with anything else.

>>49577005
>you have unlucky dice?
how? we play online. Besides swapping dice won't help
>your build is sub optimial?
min-maxing, here we go!
>you can't survive because my math was wrong?
oh, great, a retcon...

>>49577048
>Grinding play to a halt is better than winging it with a fudge or two.
Yeah, no.

>>49577071
>how? we play online. Besides swapping dice won't help

Sorry, I don't believe in spoops.

>>49571467
I hate this so much, when a martial does it's work fine it's broken, when a caster does it, it's expected because magic.

>>49570546
Annoying, but reasonable sadly.

Like others suggested, if they are your friends and you trust them, try to get her to know them before playing.
Like you, her and one of the new guys play a board game at your place first.
Then you, her and another new guy.

>>49576654
This anon gets it.

File: 1428815856173.jpg (30KB, 462x254px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 462x254px

>>49570473
>want to start a 30th century sci-fi campaign centering around trading, bounty hunting and space exploration
>have little to no experience on world building
>get overwhelmed by the amount of sci-fi literature
>have the most basic understanding on physics and general relativity
>barely able to grasp how alcubierre drive works in theory
>bummed by the thought of having to justify the plausibility of such a device to maintain suspension of disbelief
>not even sure if the few friends I generally play with would even be interested in such a setting

>GM uses untested homerules
>Blames players when unexpectedly something goes wrong
Fuck this, monks aren't broken, if you don't allow magic items but you put Mage Armor and Barkskin on a monk of course it's going to have more AC than a Paladin/Fighter, but that's not because Monk is broken, is because he benefits from those spells but other classes can't benefit from Magic armors and shields.

>>49575020
I think they can be acting like they perceive their players.
And by doing that they show how poorly prepared the new gm is, and how good they are in comparison.
I think it also can be motivated by wanting to just bask in the freedom and not caring about responsibility for a change.

>>49575782
Just play freeform.

>As a GM he railroads hard as fuck, never allows anything remotely interesting, indiscriminately bans stuff just because, core only, 15 point buy, etc
>As a player always minmax and powergames as much as he can, always wants everything, complains when he doesn't have above divinity stats, always try to play blatantly broken homebrewed classes and races, always wants to be on the spotlight and derails games as much as he can
Hypocrisy to the max

>>49577327
One thing I've learned from writing, it's better to bluff than to rigorously explain everything.
Sometimes, a rocket just works because it is a rocket, what's important is what your group does with the rocket.

>>49577046
If you got TPKed, it was probably because of your own stupidity. I'll fudge things A LITTLE to make things easier/harder, but that doesn't have to be limited to dice rolls.
If most of the party is killed, then the survivors regroup to find a new party before the villain does things.
TPK? You're the backup team now that nobody knew about until now other than the DM because that was a contingency plan.
Or the villain wins and your next campaign is set under his rule, with you as The Resistance or some shit.
Actions have consequences. Otherwise, why do the PCs do anything?

>>49577327
>scifi
>plausibility

I mean, there's definitely some good hard sci-fi out there, but if you're going to have FTL you might as well accept that you'll have to do certain amount of hand-waving. Just make some convincing-sounding technobabble about exotic matter, neutral neutrinos and WIMPs.

>>49577376
>If you got TPKed, it was probably because of your own stupidity.
Sure, it definitely can't be because luck was against us for once, yep. And it's definitely because I didn't play an optimized character like I usually do and all the others did!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>If most of the party is killed, then the survivors regroup to find a new party before the villain does things.
That's what most groups do, yeah. Excetp
>TPK? You're the backup team now that nobody knew about until now other than the DM because that was a contingency plan.
Yeah... all those plans, the developed personality and relationships with NPCs and PCs alike are all *poof* gone, all just because I got stabbed by a lucky crit from a spider and couldn't make my death throws. The backstory, the party dynamic? Pff, who needs that!

We have got backup teams no one knows about! So even if we fail to kill the ancient evil, someone else certainly can! Yay! It's not fudging at all!

>Or the villain wins and your next campaign is set under his rule, with you as The Resistance or some shit.
If the villain won because of luck, I really don't want to play in your game. I would have to optimize and min-max to heaven and back to make sure that I can develop my character fairly well, before another lucky shot kills him.

No thanks.

>Actions have consequences. Otherwise, why do the PCs do anything?
>implying a little fuding here and there takes player agency away

>>49571110
Seriously i dont understand these people that cant spare a few minuites to make a post.
Especialy in combat you dont even have to write straight away just read it in the morning then decide what to do during the day and make your post in the afternoon.

>>49577376
>If you got TPKed, it was probably because of your own stupidity
Do you really think TPK happen only under player's fault?
Counterexample:
>Playing early 3.5
>We have to hunt a group of velocirraptors
>Find 3 of them
>How are they, GM?
>You know, velocirraptors, two legged dinosaurs with claws and jaws full of teeth
>Well, we approach stealthy
>They spot us, roll ini
>Raptos win ini
>One pounces and instantly kills one PC
>Fight against them and they're super hard
>Try to flee but they're faster
>Pounce the last PC to death
>GM, what the fuck? how are were they so hard? they're smaller than a dog!
>Smaller than a dog? velocirraptors are taller than a human
The retard assumed the velocirraptor is what JP had, and he used the stats of the DEINONYCHUS instead of the velocirraptor because he thought the tiny size was a mistake

So GM made two mistakes, one lying about the description of the monster, two using a different monster, the moment.

Similar happened with a group of badgers, another GM "forgot" about the DIRE part and that they were medium not small

>>49577442
>Yeah... all those plans, the developed personality and relationships with NPCs and PCs alike are all *poof* gone
It's about the journey, not the destination. The memories and experiences aren't gone.
The ways the party affected the world still exist. Characters leave impacts on the worlds they interact with.
New dynamics can always be made. New characters are just new chances for new experiences.

Losing can be very fun as long as you're not concerned with 'winning', which is sounds like you are. With all the talk about optimizing and minmaxing, it really sounds like you've never played a game outside modern D&D and closely related systems.

>>49577394
>plausibility
>same thing as realism

This is my problem with hard sf (they'd probably crucify you for calling it sci-fi). What is plausible is informed by the internal logic of the setting, combined with our layman's understanding of our world. Star Trek is plausible because it pays lip service to certain concepts in physics, such as with its warp drive, but also because the cultures of the people they interact with function consistently, and the character behave realistically towards each other. However, it is not realistic.

On the other hand you have someone like Charles Stross, who argues a form of "realism" where human space travel is unrealistic, and he posts huge cry-pieces on his blog where he calls anyone who is in favour of manned space travel "space cadets". He also thinks that true AI is impossible. So he wrote a book about space travelling sentient AI's, who are basically human mentally, because that's what they were based on. And every single one of them was a slave to sadistic masters, and the sexbots got literally raped by pedophiles to teach them about sex and obedience.

And that's where realism and plausibility completely zoom past each other. From a realism standpoint, reasonable (as long as you don't get into psychology, the abhorred "soft science" by these wannabe engineers). But plausibility? Futuristic pseudo-Western society building an entire culture on slavery and rape? Not really.

>>49570473
>joining a game with gays 2016

Gays are the only case where someones character is also their magical realm.

>>49577580
It won't be the same though. I was invested in that character, and him dying like a dog, because of a shitty random encounter with some gnoll raiders no less, is Really frustrating.
>It's about the journey, not the destination.
You see, I like the journey. But I like myself the destination too.
>The memories and experiences aren't gone.
Maybe not, but they are forever tainted because now the group is kill, all because of a shitty random ambush of some shitty gnolls who had a bit higher initiative.
>New dynamics can always be made.
It's not as easy as you think it is.
>New characters are just new chances for new experiences.
Then you hear things like
>"I liked my old character better..."
>"My other character was so much better than this. Especially when he did X with other PC..."

>Losing can be very fun as long as you're not concerned with 'winning'
I like a good balance between losing and winning. Mostly I like the party winning when our characters are well thought-out, collaborative with each other and very well balanced overall.
(cont.)

>>49577640
So we also have the concept of a "Noble Death", or when a character goes out in a blaze of glory. A character death can really unite the party around a goal, especially if that character was really well-liked. There's a reason this is one of the oldest tropes in the book: it fucking works.

I mentioned before that your big bad monsters shouldn't just waste the party with a flurry of insanely good rolls, but when creating boss encounters, you should tune the encounter to cause the deaths of 1-2 players. This doesn't mean that players will die every time; remember, players are crafty animals! The only reason they play the game is to succeed against the challenges you put before them. Part of that challenge is accepting the fact that their character might die. And that's the way the game is meant to be played.

But what you need to try to avoid is the "Revolving Door" scenario, where players die so often that the main party is completely unrecognizable from the outset; or one player just keeps dying so often that his new characters really tax the storyline and legitimacy of the setting. I can tell you firsthand that nothing destroys immersion like a player's new character showing up every other week or so to fill the gap that their deceased character opened. It sucks.

Unfortunately, there's no easy way out of that situation, and you'll just have to talk to that player to make a concerted effort to stop dying.

But if there's a point to be made here is that Character Death is an inevitable and essential part of any game: just try not to overdo it.

>>49577651
>The only reason they play the game is to succeed against the challenges you put before them.
Untrue. Many players want to explore their characters and fill their lives with adventure. Sometimes adventure is dying to stupid wolves.
>And that's the way the game is meant to be played.
No, many games are designed to be played in different, other ways.

Games where you have tons of characters dying all the time can be great.
Games where characters just never die and have no threat of death and can be great.

More than fudging my frustration comes from the fact you only envision a single type of game and claim it the 'the correct game'. You have a narrow range of experiences and it shows.

>>49577742
>Untrue. Many players want to explore their characters and fill their lives with adventure. Sometimes adventure is dying to stupid wolves.
Good for one-shots or very short campaigns.
Not long lasting ones where people want to actually explore a character's personality, story and build a world around this character.

>No, many games are designed to be played in different, other ways.
No shit sherlock

>Games where you have tons of characters dying all the time can be great.
Keyword is can. And yes, they can, you just need to look at 40k Only War, with the intro of the all guardsmen party.
>Games where characters just never die and have no threat of death and can be great.
Can, but they are mostly boring.

>More than fudging my frustration comes from the fact you only envision a single type of game and claim it the 'the correct game'. You have a narrow range of experiences and it shows.
As >>49576615 said: if you like your games to be totally random, you're better off playing MMORPGs or CRPGs.

>player shows up a little bit early, excited to play
>another player shows up late
>other two players no-show, no-call
>have to call off the game an hour after the scheduled starting time
>this happens three weeks in a row
>the first player looks crushed
>no-showers ask me when the next game is and tell me how excited they are

>>49578053
You can have a good game with just two players, you know. Just stop inviting people who won't show up.

I'm on mobile, so I can't green text that well, so I'm just going to rant to get it out of my system.

One player in our group is systematically late. Even if we were to tell him the wrong time, he'd still show up late or not at all. This isn't type thats accurate when they're late, it's the "5 more minutes, I'm rushing" for 45-fucking-minutes. Once he did this for an hour and a half before not showing up at all. Another time he just left the session halfway through because "friends showed up at my house." Maybe, I don't know, tell them you're busy and to come back later? Perhaps I'm being unsympathetic, but if I'm committed to something and others are relying on me, I fucking stay committed.

I know I'm going too far with griping about this but, GM godamnit, learn to improvise. Last session on went for an hour and 15 minutes (we started a half an hour late due to above), and when we went faster than he expected he just said "Welp, thats all I had planned for this week. Unless theres anything else you guys want to talk about, we'll see you next week." Look, I look forward to playing D&D all week. I'm excited to get started, but every 4 hour session that we have planned has been 2 and half hours max for the past two months. I feel so blueballed at the end of every session. I feel like I'm not getting as much respect from everyone else because I show up on time and prepared, no other plans for the next 4 or 5 hours, and decline to make plans with friends with D&D in mind.

Yes, this is an online game and I've been considering dropping it for something at my FLGS

>>49579119
Drop it, go to your FLGS, physical beats online every single time

There is only one answer to the fudging question. It depends on the game, and the game your players are expecting. I personally roll open and don't fudge because i like the uncertainty and thinking on my feet when things go unexpectedly. You may fudge in your game if that's the game you want to run.

BUT

If you fudge as a dm your players better know it. They better be ok with you saying "You guys are getting bad luck, so I am making this attack miss instead of hit." Because if you hide it, I have to ask you why. And I may assume that it is because you assume they would disapprove of it, and want to maintain the "illusion" of your game being one thing when it is something different entirely. And that is bullshit.

>>49571533
You have obviously never interacted with humans.

>expectations =/= reality
And I don't mean what you build in your head, I mean what the GM literally describes to you that has nothing to do what with is going to happen.

My biggest let down was when I started playing DnD for the first time, it was 3.5 and I rolled a monk, I like the idea of being a strong independent brawler who needs no magic or equipment and GM recommended me monk, together with my Godly stats (two 18s and two 16s) I made a Dex monk (recommended by the GM), according to him my character was the shit, dextrous and strong as fuck...this of course was only in his mind because in the game was very different, everybody was better than me at everything and I was never able to accomplish anything worth mentioning. I just ketp surviving because enemies ignored me or because I ran faster than them.

Another examples
>GM says epic/fantastic/heroic game, then is dirty farmers shanking each other in the mud till one dies of disentery
>GM says fmagical world, then the most magical stuff we see is a dwarf
>GM says postapocaliptic world were we have to survive, then turns out everybody is as postapocaliptic as Boston (all those points wasted in wasteland survival, tracking and archaic weapons for fucking nothing)
Etc

>>49570473
>>DM a campaign for the better part of two years
>>Have plenty of real-life obligations that are far more important, yet stick to it out of principle (and we have fun!)
>>Have to deal with a "That guy" and an aloof grognard for as long.
>>Nearly 90% done
>>Three players quit over the course of the last summer, effectively killing the whole campaign.

This shit makes me lose my mind. How fucking simple is it for players, versus DMs.
>>Just have to show up, barely prepared and roll dice.
>>I prep entire scenarios and encounters, characters and settings. Music, effects, dialogue...
>>This was on roll20
>>How fucking degenerate can a player get?

Makes me never want to DM again.

>>49570473
I cringed.

>>49576978
>>Fantasy
>>Sudden endings
Pick one.

>>49577048
>>"I don't always DM, but when I do, I make it as forgettable as possible."
>>DosequisDMfaggot.jpg

>>49573747
What if one person in the party can handle absolutely everything on their own without danger, it just takes a little longer?

>>49575808
Sorry you're a shit player.

If you've ever been challenged by anything other than more than 2x what your group "should" be handling, then you're fucking bad at building.

>GM invites a new player
>Turns out to be a no job amateur novelist
>Fucker pulls off 50 pages of backgroud with rich prose for his 2nd level character
>GM expects we do the same
No, just no.

>>49570473
>Dumbest guy at the table insisting on playing one of the most complex character types available.

He wanted to be a dual wielding druid. Which means having to prepare from a massive spell list, managing his animal companion, managing his numerous alternate forms and trying to make his martial choices viable.

He turned into a giant squid to try (and fail) to grapple a flying monster. He turning into a toxic mushroom when we were fighting a fucking stone golem. He didn't even know he was a prepared caster at the start until we double checked what spells he had prepared.

Life would have been a lot easier if he were a fighter. He'd have been way more useful.

>>49570632
So jump him as a group after a game outside the house and beat him to death.

File: image.jpg (81KB, 720x720px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 720x720px

>>49577366
Stop playing with him.

>>49581343
I did, it still makes my blood boil thinking about it though.

>>49571085
>i just don't got anymore funny voices in me
this is the saddest thing i've ever read

>>49571817
Well I assume she was molested..?

>>49573747
oh yeah., just like that episode of adventure time

>>49573785
must be nice to have friends who invite you to things

>>49575398
the fuck is that last line?

>>49575746
Wrong, you carebear faggot. Roleplaying games are a challenge to be overcome. You kill shit and take its loot. Whoever has the most wealth at the end of the game, wins.

>>49575814
what kind of nerd gets invested in imaginary characters you know are just gonna die in two sessions anyway

>>49575838
That's okay, I'll keep winning at everything forever and you can keep making excuses for your inability to win any competition.

>>49575896
lol carebears, kill yourselves

>>49576184
I will insult anyone who has fun incorrectly. Fuck off.

>>49576267
>doing anything without at least six layers of irony
It's like you're a child.

>>49576295
video games don't require effort, retard. rpgs do.

>>49576769
The GM doesn't decide what encounters you face. If you're in an area that has monsters, you'll run into those monsters. Regardless of whether they're at, above, or below your level.

>>49576852
None of that is stupid. Your character doesn't deserve success, and fun is not contingent on character success.

>>49576933
>not playing a party of all chaotic neutral paladins

>>49577073
Yeah, yes.

>>49577327
you've already put more work in than 99% of GMs, and your players don't give a shit enough to need to suspend disbelief in the first place

>>49571983
...Gyro?

File: 126546306.png (23KB, 333x260px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 333x260px

>>49582534

File: Lucky-Dice[1].jpg (154KB, 314x223px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 314x223px

>>49570473
>Started playing tabletop RPGs with my online friends a few years back
>One friend has a reputation of being lucky with his dice rolls
>"Lucky", rolling hidden dice
>Didn't think much of it at the time
>All of his characters roll high stats, often the highest in the party
>He likes to play big beefy beat-stick melee dudes, so hitting consistently is expected, but he never rolls below a 10
>Unless rolling below a 10 doesn't matter anyway
>Starting to suspect something
>His unbelievable "luck" is an inside joke among our DMs now
>They actually have to plan encounters with his "luck" in mind
>We've used Roll20 for years but no one will ask him to roll online
>Recently rolled a "16, no, 15" on a 1d8+6.
>When asked what his damage modifier was, he had to fucking look it up
>But wait, didn't he just roll his damage?
>Is he even trying anymore?
>He just rolled up a class with a case of MAD, but of course he'll roll the stats he needs, won't he?
>15,15,15,16,15,13
>No one is saying anything
>Am I going crazy?

But why should this even bother me? We're all on the same team, right? Right...?

File: Give em the boot.gif (2MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x240px

>>49583081
See pic as to what you should do

This is a venting thread, anon. It's a safe space. It's okay, go ahead, you can let all of those feelings out.

File: 1461610643427.png (221KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

221KB, 500x375px

>have a lot of fun playing mtg
>had a buddy I could play with once and a while
>he turned into an asshole
>social anxiety prevents me from making friends
>now I have a ton of fancy commander decks, but no one to play with

>>49583824
>once and a while
I would have played with you, but you went ahead and blew it

>>49583865
>the city of me
Once in a while... well fuck at least there's a reason I'm alone. I'd even let you use my super fancy Memnarch or Brago decks filled with spicy nonsense like Palace Jailer and Breaching Leviathan.

>>49583932
>spicy nonsense
Are you building Uril right now?

>>49583140
Since I'm not the DM, and we're all friends, I don't think it's my decision to make. I could complain, but if the DM isn't going to do anything about it anyway, then all I've done is complain. Of course, this problem could have been solved very easily a long time ago. If it were my game, I'd just use point-buy, and having everyone do their rolls online would make things faster and easier. The inability to cheat is just an incidental bonus.

File: p18-schreiber-zilla-a-20160911-870x609.jpg (89KB, 870x609px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 870x609px

>D&D is every thursdays from 7 to 11
>send reminder text on tuesday
>send another text on thursday morning
>players not showing up for the game
>call them
>"Oh I forgot"

I guess they just don't check their phones

>want to have a conversation about Myfarog's mechanics
>can't because /pol/ and /leftypol/ are going nuts and their collective virtue signalling drowns everything out.

>Translating from 3.5 to PF
>"Well, do the same char and add 2 levels because some time has passed"
>Ok
>"Anon, why your char has more %to hit than before?"
>Because I have +2 BaB from those extra levels, +1 to Str and Weapon Focus
>"Anon, I said you should have the same char, please, redoo it till you have the same %to hit"
And this was when I discovered my GM was autist, I always thought he was only thorough, but no, he was full autismo

>half these posts are autistic no lives complaining that sometimes their group has something to do other than play board games with a bunch of guys
lol, sorry but not everyone is a hopeless virgin with no drive to experience life

Y'all niggers talking about cheating on dice rolls and "winning" and shit. Just for once I want to lose a game of DND. Our 5ever gm always makes shit too easy and whenever someone actually fucking dies (rare!!!) they go off on the gm about how bullshit it was of him to expect us to not try to fight [the thing we obviously wouldn't fight if we weren't murderhobos] and how date he just kill off the character that I care so deeply about blah blah blah. As a result he is even more scared to give us real challenges. My characters have never died, and at this point just once I want to play in a campaign and just fucking die. Not because I'm a murderhobo but fair and square because the campaign was just too hard for me to handle. Just once, please?

>>49571217
WTF?

If the GM was that desperate to end things, he should have just passed the torch on to someone else.

File: 1470681519813.jpg (27KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 512x512px

>>49585048
???

I need a question.

How difficult is it to find a new gaming group through games in conventions? A couple weeks ago I went to one expecting to find a new group, given I literally know nobody in this huge ass city. I played 5e, had a blast, and then everyone parted ways, leaving me quite disappointed.

Any tips? Please consider I'm shy and initiating social interaction is already difficult for me.

>>49587158
>I need a question.
I HAVE a question* sorry I'm somewhat sleepy

>>49570987
I thought you meant the game when I first read that

>>49585048
That's not autism.

That's just being an asshole.

>>49586014
Good point. From my group of friends, I've had a few different DMs, and every one of them has pulled their punches when things look grim. It's apparently an intense session if just one person falls to single-digit health. Even supposedly "dark" and "gritty" campaigns are only so in their themes; every encounter is a power fantasy.

That "lucky" friend of mine that I've mentioned? He once threw a bit of a shit-fit when things didn't go his way. He initiated a grapple against a river drake, and actually succeeded at first, holding it down while the rest of us pummeled it, but when the drake overpowered him, it picked him up, and dropped him 30 feet before flying away. This "bullshit" he called it, was perfectly within the rules, and yes, the drop was going to hurt, but it wasn't going to kill him or some nonsense. But he threw such a fit, that the DM finally conceded, "Fine, it didn't happen." What awful sportsmanship. Sometimes, the risks you take as adventurers pan out for the worse. Who ever said this wasn't a dangerous job? I can accept that. I want that.

Of course, DMs don't have to try very hard to kill their player characters; sometimes, they don't try at all. That wouldn't be particularly satisfying, either. But the threat of failure; the feeling that your next decision, your next roll might be your last, can be thrilling. It's not a thrill I've known but for fleeting moments, with long stretches apart.

File: fite me.gif (529KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

529KB, 480x360px

>>49586014
I feel a bit upset now, because it seems that you are selectively ignoring specific parts of my discussion.

Please refer to >>49577651 to read what I think about player death.

>>49585048
What does stupidity have to do with autism in this case? The GM clearly had no fucking clue what the shit he was doing, since he can't fathom that a character would be better at hitting shit at higher levels.

>>49590023
"Noble death" is bullshit though, since you've still made the game effectively impossible to "lose".

>>49590043
If the players figure out that the game is impossible to lose, I'm a bad GM.

The secret lies therein that the Players won't realize that I'm fudging a few dice so that the encounters are harder or a little easier when the monster is rolling really well.

And if the players care about the story and the characters, they are not likely to notice or care, if they do.

>>49572387
Holy shit, you're almost me.

My brew is 28 pages, max, 5 pages are skill descriptions and 3 pages are just a shorter, tard-friendly summary of the other 25, and they've been playing for two years and still won't understand the most fundamental concept of task resolution because it's not 'roll 1d20 then ask which numbers to add to it while looking as fucking helpless as possible despite claiming you've been gaming for years.'

Except the sub-20 pages thing, all other stuff is identical.

>GM doesn't let you optimize neither gives you magic items
>Still throws at you between CR and CR+2 encounters 4 times a day
>Complaings when we aren't invested at all in the story

>>49570632
If you're mainly with your friends then just leave and host your own game.

>>49571550
So kick him. Sounds to me like he deserves it.

>>49576257
>you're the GM you should be impartial and fair
The GM's role is to be a conduit between the players and the world. You're not there to be fair and impartial, you're there to create a fun experience for everybody at the table yourself included.
If fudging a roll means that the party doesn't get wiped and we get to continue on the fun adventure you bet your ass I'm going to fudge the shit out of the roll.
Fudging allows you to be more dramatic, it allows you to tell a better story. One of the pc's get's taken an inch away from death, no hope for survival as they're about to be killed. They throw out a last effort swing, they cut down their foe with the last of their strength and stories are told of his might on the battlefield for years to come.

You are there to tell a story. You are not an amoral god. You are the shit GM.

>>49590909

>>49576257
Whoops, sorry. The post I meant to quote and reply to was >>49576269

Been jonesing for some gaming, but moved to a different state for job and so lost my old group. Find a post on reddit for a play by post 40k thing.
I'm in

Make an account, see on the front page two events. 41st millenium and 43rd millenium.
Realize that the board is doing an event, storyline taking place in their own homebrewed 43rd millienium after some big events.

Whatevs I'll make my character for 41st setting anyways cause that's what I know best and didn't really pay attention to the initial reddit post.

Make my character, a cocky Ratling with a habit of embellishment. Ready to get started.

Turns out no one else has made characters for the 41st millenium setting, everyone else is playing in the event in the 43rd millenium.

Feel kind of foolish now as I wait for some other people to join and play in the 41st setting. Not really an issue or anything, just feel like a bonehead for not paying better attention.

>>49585911

Said the NEET.

>>49575476
It takes away the danger. I know my DM wont fudge his dice and he's pretty HC and dont mind TPKing party, when it makes sense. I mean, it kinda depends on what kind of game are you running, but i believe if you are willing to fudge roll, you shouldnt roll at all.

>have a familiar gaming group with the best party composition we've ever had in this one game, our characters IC interactions being an absolute joy to play out
>GM takes forever to run a session, sometimes waiting months at a time between sessions, and said sessions are usually underwhelmingly short and have shoddy encounters
Nothing hurts more than squandered potential.

>>49571817
>Molesters? Storytiem?

Fixed.

Man, what a shitstorm about fudging. All of you saying that fudging can be fun if done right.
What if I tell you this: Open rolling, if done right, can be fun too.
I have played under a play-by-book kind of GM, we rolled in the open and he compared that to the charts. It sucked, I died multiple times (but it was an IG oneshot, so not a big deal) and generally I avoided doing things requiring a roll.

But I also have played under a GM who had roll us in the open, he did as well and was very strict, that what rolls, happens. But it was up to him what exactly happened. If you rolled shit against an attack you didn't get damaged more, it just meant that the attacker passed your defence. If he was aiming for your arm, then you were wounded in your arm. If he was aiming for your neck (and you are fighting against a sword withoud protecion like the last dolt), well that's what Fate points are for. If you consequently rolled shit throughout a fight and showed no sign of improvement (and you for some reason couldn't run) he'd have you go unconcious.
I don't get how all the people advocate depending only on the dice. I played under such GM, and it was one of the worst sessions in my life
>"as the traitor guardsman drops dead before you, you hear the unmistakeable sound of a safety pin leaving the grenade, as it drops from his limp hand."
>"ok, I tryto kick it away and then dive for cover"
he looks at my char sheet
>"allright, this is your first time playing warhammer, so I'll give you an advice. This roll would be for athletics, but if you try to strike the grenade with your chainsword, you'll get its bonus."
>"What? That doesn't make any sense!"
>"Welp, those are the rules"

So I tried to hit it with my chainsword. And died in the blast because I rolled high. This, right there, is being a shit gm.

>>49595817
This is putting roll before play. If I were him, I would have allowed the attempt for a dive, and had the player failed as miserably as I did, I'd have him ride the blastwave and get knocked unconcious, because this creates a liability for the group, but doesn't neccesarily kill off a key character.
Now I haven't played under someone who fudged rolls, but it seems fairly similar to good open roll practice. Just it involves less soft influence via storyteling, but more showing the finger to the mechanics of the game and the harsh mistress of propability. All in the same purpose of improving gameplay and having fun.

>>49595817
>>49595856
Also, before the die-hard fans of open rolling and high lethality jump me, I don't say that it is bad.
When you are playing in a high lethality setting, death is expected. Again, it furthers the gameplay and fun. But one has to approach a high lethality game differently than a regular one.
I wouldn't throw a character I was creating the backstory for for the past few weeks into the meatgrinder to die.
But I will gladly do so with the rough concept of a mook No 143.
/rant, take me apart /tg/

> significant other offers to let me play a quick npc/non main adventurer in their campaign to get me a feel for their group
> they all insist that I know too much despite being a quest giver/basically a follower and actually asking questions and listening instead of yelling at each other about fucking memes
> leave after one session and feel bad, but at least they are cool guys outside of DnD
Now I know to stick to my own lesbian vampire group even if they all were really great players t b h