ITT: Things your players say that destroy immersion

>>51475081
>>this plot hook is stupid, why does he want us to bring him the golden idol for safe keeping if there's already golems and shit protecting it?
That's a valid question though.

>>51475105
>That's a valid question though.
Which should be asked in-character rather than out of character

>>51475231
unless you're playing a bard who makes analogies with stories and scenario...

File: DMing.gif (2MB, 299x320px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 299x320px

>>51475105
Yes it is a valid question.
It would be nice if it could be asked to the other characters
maybe after you finish fighting the golem in question
at a time when your character is conscious
and maybe instead of just throwing it out to the ether, following up on it
to see if there's some information that your characters don't know.

I blame video games

>>51475081
Yeah but you should not just stay silent, shrug and move on. You should explain them that metagame is bad and they should feel bad.

>>51478439
>suggesting to a GM to not be a passive aggressive autist
>on /tg/

>>51475081
Tell them to stop metagaming and if they don't then fuck them in ass In game, not in real life...unless you are roll that way

>>51475081
>hey, we're out of pizza
>your basement smells
>bob, i think i heard your mom calling you

>>51476360
It's a question that should probably be asked before you fight golems, immediately after you discover it is defended by golmes really.

>>51475081
The answer to all of those is
>your character doesn't know
Say that and nothing more, every time. It works

File: 1483057496771.jpg (149KB, 1024x819px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 1024x819px

>>51475081
>I think we should end the session now
>I think the session is now ending
>What's my initiative/to hit/AC/HP/damage
>What does my spell do
>My character is to bad
>Does it look like he has a high Wis
>I know how this works, I die (after one weakhit and we're level 17)
>We could end this campaign and do a different one
>How does he have that spell? That's of the wrong class
>His will is higher than mine and I have okay will, wtf
>What is this monster's regeneration
>Huh I forgot what was happening
>Your character is overpowered
>Nothing matters because X's character is overpowered
>Wah Y gets along better with NPCs than I do
>I hate all of your NPCs
>You're a bad DM
>You're getting all the main character stuff so stop wasting time
This is about 3 years worth of shitty quotes from my friends and they only become worse

>>51482384
>>Nothing matters because X's character is overpowered

What were the specifics of this? Because it's a legit criticism when it's about DnD and a min-maxed high level wizard in a party of unoptimized funPCs.

>>51475081
>But but rape is immoral!

>>51483110
Mildly related. Had a player say this when I ran a game where I had nameless NPC's get raped, pillaged, and murdered (not necessarily in that order) in order to drive home that "the BBEG is REALLY fucking evil".

The frustrating bit wasn't the acknowledgement that it was immoral and terrible, it was that in the game he GM'ed, he had my male elf character get consistently attacked by tentacled monsters that were very interested in my pants. Which he thought was quite hilarious. Admittedly I agreed the first time, then it quickly became stupid.

No, the annoyance was that his objection was made OOC because he didn't really like the idea of fighting evil minions who raped things. Despite something consistently trying to rape my character at least once every time he was GM.

>>51475081
"How much do the potatoes cost?"

>>51484747
DELET THIS

>>51475081
>yes, I heard you say he looks pretty rough, but EXACTLY how much HP does the ogre have left?
To be fair this is a partially legitimate question. While the exact HP is metagaming if I have been hacking at a dragon or ogre or whatever for ten minutes I kind of want to know if I am actually doing anything. Saying "he's looking a little rough" is useless. What does he have a bruise on his face or is he missing an arm, limping, and wheezing like he is about to collapse? You don't need to give the exact HP, nor do you need to be highly detailed but at least give a good idea of what condition he is in. Just have generic levels of nearly dead
>Minor injuries
>A little rough
>Fucked up
>Nearly dead
>Ded
At least then I know "hey I might be able to finish him off soon" or "fuck it we need to retreat or change our strategy."

>this plot hook is stupid, why does he want us to bring him the golden idol for safe keeping if there's already golems and shit protecting it?
This is a legitimate question.
>wait, those two spells aren't on the sorcerer list, what class is this guy again?
This is a legitimate question. You should be expected to be consistent, if you say someone is a sorcerer but give them druid spells it eliminates my ability to take your word at face value. If I know that you just give enemies random abilities because why not, telling me that someone is a renowned swordsman is useless to me because for all I know he could have random traits or spells from unrelated classes.
>If we decide to fight these guys, how much experience do we get?
Don't give xp for killing shit, you just incentivize murder hoboing. Either have them level up when they accomplish something major (eg. a major arc) or give them xp for the accomplishment of overarching goals regardless of the means.

Fuck-asses in my group who get pissy when the creature has some shit they don't know. This is in Pathfinder, by the way.

> you take 4 damage
> but you rolled a 2
> yeah they have a bonus to damage
> how?? they are using longbows
> they just do

They had weapon specialization.....

Also when the characters ask exactly what the hp, AC, etc of the monster is. One of the guys in my gorup literally stands behind me while I am DMing. This was important for our other DM because he didn't know the rules that well so we would help him with the combat and just pretend we didn't know the monster's stats at all. But for fucks sake I know how to DM, quit fucking cheating. I've been playing 3.5 twice as long as any of them. It's not the only system we play thank god.

>>51485380
>One of the guys in my gorup literally stands behind me while I am DMing.

This is where you use the advanced strategy known as 'talk to them like an adult'.

Take the problem player aside and tell him that you're not other DM, you know what you're doing, and him hovering over your shoulder is kind of rude and you'd appreciate it if he sat down like the rest of the group. If he refuses, then feel free to tell him to fuck off.

>>51485208
>metagaming
>metagaming
>metagaming
>legitimate questions
1. Ask if it's wounded, not hp
2. Ask NPCs not GM
3. Do your character know all spells wizard can use?

>>51475231
>verily and for sooth. The events we find ourselves in are like a terribly written story and the gods seem like morons.
>Strewth, Jethro. Perhaps we should replace the gods with ones that aren't like bundles of sticks.

>>51482384
>You're a bad DM

Just going off your post, this is accurate.

You must've got shitty luck with players. The only time we reference that shit is when we're making jokes.

>>51487250
This is actually how I handle requests not to make OOC comments.

>>51483260
To be fair there's a difference between a dog humping your leg and a child-molesting priest. I can understand why he doesn't view tentacle beasts and human soldiers in the same light.

He's still a moron, granted.

>>51485208
>wait, those two spells aren't on the sorcerer list, what class is this guy again?
>This is a legitimate question. You should be expected to be consistent, if you say someone is a sorcerer but give them druid spells it eliminates my ability to take your word at face value. If I know that you just give enemies random abilities because why not, telling me that someone is a renowned swordsman is useless to me because for all I know he could have random traits or spells from unrelated classes.

You sound autistic and if someone bitched at me for having creatures that aren't player characters not act entirely like player characters I'd tell them to fuck off from my table.

>>51475081
Play Paranoia.

Claiming any knowledge of the rules is treason and grounds for immediate in-game termination.

But honestly, this >>51478439 >>51487049

>>51485208
>HP
Just fucking ask "did my attack wound him". It's not fucking hard.

>Sorcerer spells
If it's about a PC, sure. Otherwise who fucking cares? The evil forest necromancer will have Druid spells because it's cool and/or interesting from a story or mechanical standpoint. Antagonists are not PCs, they get to ignore some of the rules.

>No XP for killing shit
That I agree with.

>>51476360

>grew up with dog from the time I was 1
>she was a golden retriever
>got arthritis so bad she couldn't walk
>had to be put down when I was 15
>that pic reminds me of her

Feels bad man.

>>51487833
I'm sorry anon. What matters is that she had a good long life, though.

>>51488022

She did, and since she my mother breeds dogs, her legacy is still around, 12 years later.

>>51482809
A fellow players was giving the barbarian shit for being able to crit and do massive damage, while he the cleric could only do massive damage with expenditure of a spell slot. Later the caster "btfo" him by being able to wipe a room of people while barbarian can only kill 1-2 targets a turn maybe

>>51487258
Those quotes are over the course of multiple campaigns and have a wide range of recipients, the only one directed at me while I DM'd was "this guy has higher will than I do"

>No, don't stop. Just going to rub one out real fast.

How would you convey the typical "How many spell slots do you have left?" question in-universe?

>>51488788
"Spell slots" are an in-universe thing to begin with.

>>51487499
Where does a gnoll cleric fall on this spectrum?

>>51488805
gnolls don't rape
they're pure "I want to eat you to death" without sexual tension

>>51488985
>gnolls don't rape
Now this is a curious subject.
Why don't they? There are all manner of halfbreeds but not half-gnolls?..

>>51489076
Because you're food.

>>51488788
Depends on the game and setting. But assuming standard DnD:
"how many spells do you still remember? "

>>51488788
In my game, we called em 'valences' after a greentext story I read ages ago. "How many valences do you have left?"

>>51489096
Orcs and ogres eat other humanoids too.

>>51488788
I figure "how many spells do you have left/can you still cast" is something you could ask a wizard IC.

>>51487770
>Antagonists are not PCs, they get to ignore some of the rules.
Not in my book.

>>51487770
>Antagonists are not PCs, they get to ignore some of the rules.
I can kind of see where both saids are coming from.
On one hand if NPCs can only go by the book and stat blocks, it makes NPCs predictable and the players can plan around it. The con is the NPCs are predictable.

On the other hand it can make NPCs unpredictable and exciting but the con is that since there is no concrete rules for what an NPC can do it lends to railroad situations like "The BBEG warrior teleports right before he is killed. O-oh yeah he could do that all along!"

>>51475081
I GM a fair bit, and all of those questions are fine. I might request some rephrasing or saying it IC, but otherwise they're pertectly fine.

I play with one guy all the time who does not comprehend immersion. He can't go for five minutes without making a pop culture reference.

>>51489202
I don't think NPCs not playing by the book and NPCs being predicrable is irreconcilable.
Ideally they should do both: a barbarian bad guy who's been shown or rumored to use teleportation before the actual confrontation is an exciting new challenge without any asspulls.

>>51487770
You could have had them research the spell and learn it on their own independent invention style, that's the whole point of being a wizard! Maybe it's a level higher than normal for the flexibility or something but it could turn into interesting loot if the party gets his book and or drinks his milkshake to learn it themselves (allows carry over of some of his story, like a patron who taught it to him now calling party caster, etc, which could give more plot insight)

Oddities are opportunities to make things interesting!

>>51475081
>"I roll Diplomacy"
>"..."
>"..."
>"What do you say?"
>"I try to get him to lower the price"
>"What do you say, to him, in character, in order to get him to lower the price?"
>"lol dunno"

>>51479242
Get more pizza, clean up the basement, your mom is calling.

>>51489623
>"This parrot is obviously a demonstration model"

Shamelessly stolen from:
http://hellmoo.org/wiki/index.php/Persuade

>>51489623
Anon, lets not get into that stupid argument of trying to have a player do something that is supposed to be represented with a die roll.
Despite it all, a player really only needs to state their intent behind the roll, with the roll representing the character's attempt and skill.
Forcing the player to do it is one of the well meaning, ultimately misguided things mediocre and worse gms do.
Just like a player need not do the somatic components of a spell or describe the manner of a grappling joint lock, a player should not be forced to rp out skill use to use a skill.
Prompt roleplay in a better fashion, scrub.

>>51475081
>"Stay at least thirty feet away, that's the fear AoE passive"

>>51489676
I'm not a telepath. I can't discern what the players wants to do if they just say "I roll diplomacy". At the very least I need to know what they are doing, and in-character action is always better than out of character descriptions. I'm not saying a guy playing a diplomat should have equal oratory skills himself, I'm saying that if you want to haggle with the blacksmith, you should actually fucking haggle with the blacksmith.

As such, I kindly invite you to kiss my ass with your useless, presumptive, derogatory "advice".

>>51489676
I have a houserule that I don't let players just say "I want to roll X"
They have to first describe their action and I may or may not tell them to make a roll. Fair enough there are a few phrases that pretty much result in a roll every time like "I want to take a closer look/I want to try and and get over there stealthily/I think they might be lying"
These things are fine, a player outright saying "I want to roll, perception,stealth, insight just ruins the immersion and lets them always try and influence you to pick their best skills.

>>51489132
Some people fuck pies too.

>>51489202
the answer to your worries is to not play with cunts.

Sometimes, when combat is more OOC talk than IC talk, I tend to reveal what I've discovered to my teammates OOCly

Something like
>I think this monster has 18 AC. I couldn't hit it with 17 but I hit it with 18 the last time
>Careful not to stand behind me, it can shoot lightning in a line

I justify it by thinking that, the longer combat goes on, the more the characters actually find out about the monster that they are fighting.

>>51489623
Ask for intention not words funkle bucket.

>>51489623
>"I persuade him to lower the price"
Please, no. I don't want to have every fucking transaction accompanied by a Diplomacy challenge. It'll take three weeks just to get through town.

WFRPG is the worst offender on this list. If you roll good enough and the shopkeep rolls bad enough, he'll give you money to take the thing off your hand. Just try to buy a castle enough times, and you're golden.

>>51485208
>You slash him viciously across the chest and he staggers back clutching his wound. Who's next?
>"How much health does he have now?"
>He's holding his wound and looking very bloody: his breath is heavy and his sword hand is shaking. He doesn't look like he will fight for much longer: who is next?
>"GM, how much health does he have left?"
>He's almost dead, okay?
>"How much HP, GM?"
>Your character takes two psychic damage and can't use his movement for his next round. Next?
>"Whoa, wtf? I was just asking"

Seriously, if somebody is being a prick, sometimes I feel like acting as I just wrote is justified.

>>51489908
>t. triggered rollplayer

>>51489963
This problem is easily houseruled away though...

>>51489623
>"The shopkeeper agrees to your terms and lowers the price in exchange for you to blow him."
>"What? No! I wouldn't say that!"
>"Then what would you say?"

Works every time.

>>51490108
You're not the DM people want.

You're the DM they need.

>>51490079
I always do, but the rule is no less shit for that.

>>51490143
I agree with this anon.

>>51490108
Deus Vult you as a GM.

>>51490108
>"The shopkeeper agrees to your terms and lowers the price in exchange for you to blow him."
>"LOL ur character is gay"
>"XD"
Honestly I could see that derailing the game into lolrandum territory as much as it resolves the problem.

>>51490269
then you play with cunts

I'm currently a level 13 Rock Gnome Abjurationist in a 5E game. Me and another player were recently in another game about super heroes where we each piloted a part of what was essentially a megazord. I spend the first few minutes of the session openly speculating with other players about what we would do with a solar-powered megazord. "Me at the head with my knowledge. Barbarian at the arms with his strength. Monk at the legs with his speed. Druid at the body with his solar-power. Paladin at the heart with his courage." I then ask the DM if I could build a giant robot using tinker's tools, similar to the tiny clockwork robots afforded by my racial trait. She has me roll Intelligence (Arcana) and I get a natural 20, 30 with modifiers. She then tells me I don't know what a robot is, has me knocked unconscious during a crucial conversation with the king, and has me frightened for the rest of the session despite being in the paladin's Aura of Courage. Tell me /tg/, did I break immersion enough to warrant this? If not, how should I talk to my DM about this?

>>51490292
That goes without saying

>>51490108
That's not lowering the price, that's exploring alternate payment methods.

>>51490316
well i just fucking said it.

>>51490327
Yeah but it went without saying before that

>>51490327
It's a thread about That Guy/GM. It's safe to assume that everyone in here has played with cunts.

>>51490292
If the GM is encouraging that kind of behavior with acts like that, he deserves them.
>>51489747
>I can't discern what the players wants to do if they just say "I roll diplomacy"
>What do you say
>I say what I need to in order to get a better price
>HURR WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO SAY?!!!
Naw, mate, you are just stupid, enforcing a needless "standard" on others that sates your personal autism, but doesn't work for all players.

>>51489676
Intent alone is never enough. To resolve a player action, you need intent AND method. This is basic GMing and people need to remember this, for God's sake.

Imagine the PCs are fighting a tough orc war chief. He set camp early in the morning and the party knows the chief will leave the camp at twilight to meet with an allied ogre shaman. Then this conversation occurs:

>Player 1: We could infiltrate the camp and fuck shit up.
>Player 2: Let me handle it. I roll Stealth!
>GM: Wait, do you bring anything?
>Player 2: lol I dunno
>GM: When do you do it?
>Player 2: uhhh, don't know either

The GM needs to know what Player 2 is trying to do. If he's trying to assassinate the chief, he'll need to go before twilight. If he's trying to burn the camp down it's in his interest to wait until nightfall, when the warchief is away, but he'll need a way to set things on fire.

Trying to guess your player's methods on their intent alone will result in "wait, I didn't mean to do this" conversations and either awkward retcons or animosity.

Same goes for diplomatic interaction.

>>51490394
>one part states a course of action that is resolved by stating an intent, then testing success with dice rolls
>but the same does not apply to diplomatic means, because you have a obvious double standard

>>51489169
Well, you are free to run a game however you want. That's the best part of this kind of game. You can run the game like that and the other person can run how they want. Even better, no one is obligated to play in anyone's games.

>>51489747
Have you given the characters any information that would give them an angle to haggle from?

>>51490306
>Look anon, I don't want robots in my fantasy setting. I'm already putting up with your tiny clockwork automatons and that's enough for me.
Mature, reasonable response.

>[Snickering] Sure anon! Roll Intelligence Arcana! Hahaha. Just kidding, no matter the result I'm not going to let you build a robot, but I won't tell you no, instead I'll significantly cripple your character until you can discern the meaning of my bullshit.
Passive aggressive dick move.

>>51490394
I agree.

>"I want to steal from this guy"
>He's sitting with his mandolin at the edge of the fountain: there is a small crowd of people around him, looking right at him.
>"I roll stealth"
>Alright, you approach the crowd stealthily and manage to sneak into the crowd in front of the musician. What do you do next?
>"What do you think? I roll stealth to steal from him"
>...you try to sneak up to the guy and pick his coinpurse? While there are a dozen people watching him?
>"I rolled a 19"
>A couple of guys from the crowd grab your shoulders and ask you what the fuck you think you're doing.

This is how a situation with a retard should be handled.

>>51489811
I have been running the exact same roll for a few years and it also gets rid of that extremely annoying "I roll perception" question. YOU LOOK AROUND. When there is cause for careful examination we'll get back to perceiving things.

Also, about the persuasion thing: you may be the most honey-voiced smooth-tongued motherfucker in the world, but you're gonna need SOME train of logic before I allow a roll. This doesn't require you to be diplomatic, but it does require you to think of a reason of why they should be persuaded or dissuaded.

>>51490394
You're comparing apples and oranges here. A situation analogous with the haggle example would be this:
"I roll stealth."
"Why?"
"I'm trying to sneak into the camp, duh."
"How are you sneaking into the camp?"

>>51490367
No, no, I can safely say that I was always the cunt in every game I've been in.

>>51490476
I don't know what you're trying to prove with that example though.

>>51490488
Well, the rolling stealth thing is obviously "when it's dark and no one is looking" but I don't allow people saying they roll a skill anyway. You tell me what you do, I'll tell you what you roll.

>>51490507
Sorry, I meant to quote >>51490416

>>51490481
>it does require you to think of a reason of why they should be persuaded or dissuaded
And if the player can't think of one, they are barred from using the mechanics their character possesses?
Have you ever haggled before? You don't need to "persuade" someone, you offer a counterprice, because what people in games forget is that the seller WANTS you to buy his shit.
GMs who treat shops like a hoarder's nest are the worst.

>>51488044
Remember to pat all doggos

>>51490488
>"I roll stealth, I want to infiltrate the camp"
is to
>"I want to infiltrate the camp, I roll stealth"

what
>"I roll persuasion, I want to get a lower price"
is to
>"I want to get a lower price, I roll persuasion"

All four statements need a method anyway.

>>51490526
I agree with not allowing players to just declare a roll, I disagree with demanding detailed action when a fuzzy one will do. In the original example, the player saying "I'm trying to haggle down the price" should really be enough unless you have something in my mind and threw him a specific hook.

>>51490553
Both actions, when you distill them to what they actually are, consist of a stated goal, and the roll in order to attempt that goal.
>"I am rolling stealth to sneak into the camp"
is not inherently different from
>"I am rolling diplomatics to get a more favorable price"
But one gets demands for the player to offer more than what is called for at a pnp baseline, and those people smugly act as though doing it any other way makes you a ROLLPLAYER.
Basically, what >>51490568 said.
Stating your intent, along with what you would like to use to succeed at it, should be enough. Demanding more is not the GM's job unless more is needed to properly adjudicate the end result, and it's usually not.
I love rp, and think it makes pnp gaming worthwhile, but I do not force my players to do it. Shit, I've had times where my mind just seized up or I was too tired to shoot for the moon like I normally do. It's ok to not excel.

>>51490558
>I try to get him to lower the price
And where did you get the idea this implies haggling?
Lowballing the price works, but this could also mean threatening to shop somewhere else, persuading the merchant to help a noble cause, promising to pay half now and half later, subtly insinuating you'll ruin his reputation if he says no, etc., all of which should be Persuasion rolls, with varying difficulty and consequences.

The fact you automatically go to "well, the PC is going to haggle!" already reveals the issue with assuming your players' methods.

>>51490320
Of course. But if you value a blowjob at 3 silvers considering the factors involved and it reduces the price with 1 gp. that's a lowering of price.

>>51488805
You can't make the knight (female) ahegao with your monster cock, gnoll, it always derails the game.

>>51489202
This is why you don't play class based systems.

>>51490645
Only 1 gp? I roll seduction to increase the value of my blowjob.

File: 1485857711184.png (311KB, 540x493px) Image search: [Google]

311KB, 540x493px

>>51490320
Just how good are you at slobbering knob that you think you could charge in gold for it?

>>51490719
No no, I'm good at persuading you that it will be worth it.

>>51490637
>And where did you get the idea this implies haggling?
Because the player elected to use diplomacy, and no game I can think of combines strong arm tactics under the diplomacy skill.
>Lowballing the price works
Diplomacy
>threatening to shop somewhere else
Intimidate/Strong Arm
>persuading the merchant to help a noble cause
Diplomacy, with caveats that the player must directly state they are leveraging their reputation and have proof they are who they are.
>promising to pay half now and half later
Diplomacy, but a player who wanted to do this could likely be trusted to SAY they want to do it.
>subtly insinuating you'll ruin his reputation
Intimidate/Strong Arm
>all of which should be Persuasion rolls
What game are you playing that threats and peaceful overtures are wrapped into the same skill?
>The fact you automatically go to "well, the PC is going to haggle!" already reveals the issue with assuming your players' methods
Do you run games, anon? Yes, a GM needs to have a baseline default when the players write them a blank check for an action, and that baseline should be both fair and noninflammatory.
Further, there is a point when the GM needs realize they are derailing their own game by focusing on minutae; holding the game up so a single player can play amateur businessman hour does not do justice to the other players. I will cheerfully make a nondescript assumption, and move on with the game, rather than demand exceptionalism at every point, even when the player is not in the way to offer it.
I've had some just quiet/shy players, and demanding them to buck up and rp sometimes works in the exact opposite. I'd rather choose my spots and finesse them into being more outspoken.

File: 1474851184389.png (180KB, 323x304px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 323x304px

>>51490739
Sorry, I'm going to need to try before I buy.

>I attack the kobold, I roll to hit!
So, are you doing a stabbing motion, an overhead swing, or a sweep?
>Heh I dunno
Damn it, I'm not a fucking telepath. You don't get to decide what you roll, tell me what you want to do, then I tell you what to roll.

>>51490865
>I slash him from side to side, right to left at -his- shoulder height.

Is that so difficult?

>>51482809
>everyone in the party is optimized
>EXCEPT this new guy that just joined
>One guy is a Ardent/Monk/Ur-Priest/Thrallherd/Theurge
>He told me he was wondering if you could do ur-priest and thrallherd found the build for him

>I'm a Shadowcraft Mage Gnome Illusionist
>Last one is a Marshal 1/Archivist Anima Mage divine adaptation
>Is also a succubus and GM gave him a fucking -4 to la because he lost the summoning ability, his wings and teleport
>Told me he wanted a class that could use his charisma. He took a 1 level dip in marshal and now we all get a fucking +15 to cha rolls.

>Then there's the new guy that just joined
>Straight up paladin 7


I feel sorry for him. I'm trying to buff spells to boost his sorry ass but i'm not really a cleric

>>51490463
Yeah, I'll ask the DM to use the first response. The giant robot was supposed to be a joke (at least until I learn True Polymorph and start mass producing Shield Guardians. We'll need the war assets when we confront the BBEG, which will be CR 30 and aided by numerous cultists.) I was expecting her response to be something like "the means are currently outside your reach."

She also has a habit if ignoring rules and class features even when they're brought up. The monk was affected by a poison that turned his hands invisible, even though he was immune to poison. I might suggest the poison should be a curse instead, since a poison that ignores poison immunity would be incredibly rare and should not part of a trap for an empty treasure chest that no one cares about, but a curse is not a poison and would be something sensible for cultists to be dabbling with. She also insists on using the 4E rules for movement, object interaction, and surprise, which I don't know because I only have the 5E books.

>>51490955
Have there been other instances where the GM ignored features/traits and mechanics of the characters, actively hurting them in the process?

>>51489676
>all you need is intent

Alright, I intend to kill this orc, I rolled a 13, is it dead? Wait what the fuck do you mean "what do I hit it with?"

>>51490888
With the right setup, he could still be salvageable, but my method involves some impressive optimizing, 2 flaws, 2levels of mystic knight, a shitton of ACFs, and ultimately becoming a saint, because a paladin saint is the most evil whooping thing out there.
>>51490775
>not exploding hearts for eyes
Kusoge.

>>51490771
I personally separate subtle and unsubtle manipulation (drawing your weapon, or outright stating a threat vs. veiled insinuation), and I really don't think "you know, I'll just shop somewhere else" falls under intimidation instead of persuasion. But fair enough, this is really subjective.

I really do think a GM shouldn't choose a PC's method by themselves. The time it takes to ask the player about it is completely negligible and I don't get how you consider that "derailing". (Do you think I actually roleplay the haggling?)
After they get into the habit, having your players state their methods (which also takes a negligible amount of time) will avoid retcons in the (very common) cases where your players had a very specific idea in mind.
It'll make it easier for you to decide what happens, and your PC's interactions with the world around them will be much more colorful. (It's a lot more interesting to have a brash and impetuous character try to haggle with a high-end professional or see the Paladin try and tell grouchy, uncaring merchant's about the nobility of their quest, rather than just automatically going with the one baseline action that makes more sense in context.)

You're right about quiet and shy players, I usually make exceptions for them. Best not put them out of their comfort zone unless the situation really calls for it or they seem to be in the right mood. Same goes for players who absolutely hate roleplaying, I go with the baseline and move on but I don't allow for retcons if they didn't specify a different approach.

>>51491078
>I really do think a GM shouldn't choose a PC's method by themselves
There is a time and place.
If it is something negligible and the player does not give me a preferred method of approach, I do it quick and neat, because not every situation needs 5+ minutes of rp that doesn't include the rest of the group.

>>51491162
>Asking for method and playing out the results takes five minutes
I guess different GMing styles is why we disagree then.

>>51490984
These are the only ones I'm aware of. There may be more, since I've only been with them for one session. There have also been a couple instances where the rules were ignored to the players' benefit. This is the DM's first tiem as DM and first game in 5E. She normally players 4E, so this is probably where some of the rule disagreements are coming from.

Additionally, since I spend much more time reading the books than playing I am overeager to answer any other player's rules questions. Can this irritate a DM?

>>51491201
In that 5 minutes I can do the entire party's purchases at a shop and move on to the fun part of the game where they interact with a wider world.
Even then, I don't foist it on them. Sometimes they want to interact with a shopkeep, sometimes they don't. I let them make the choice to facilitate the game.
>>51491248
>Can this irritate a DM?
I would have pulled you aside that day and told you to shut the fuck up, in harsh terms, and to be quiet and let me do my job as a GM, in nice ones.

>>51491248
I mean: I don't just answer rules questions, but also ask the DM what's going on whenever the rules are ignored. I'm asking if this can irritate a DM.

>>51491262
Ah, understood.

>>51491291
Anon, look, from the heart:
I, as a GM, take it incredibly seriously. It's a privilege and responsibility, because when I run a game, I'm running it for my friends who expect me to make a good time for them.
Failing to make a good time is failing my friends, and that isn't an option to me.
That said, I am GM, I run this shit with an iron first. I will be fair at all times, but you will respect me and respect the position I hold. One of my big issues is people trying to backseat GM or usurp a responsibility that normally falls on the GM to handle.
I answer all questions, handle all disputes, mediate between players when need be, shepherd and nurture the group so it becomes stronger. Preventing me from doing any of the above is contrary to my hopes for the best game I, and this group, can provide. I will entreat kindly, but firmly the first time. The second, I stop being nice and give you the option to stop it or fuck outta my game.

>>51490020
I do this too
>"your inability to comprehend the knowledge flooding into your mind leaves you reeling."

>>51491351
The problem for me I believe is that back in my hometown is that I was the only one who read the books, so if I wanted a 5E game, I was foreverDMed. My current game is in Uni and it's my first time as a player in a 5E game, but my DM habits are still with me. I'll take your advice and let the DM answer all questions first.

>>51489076
I read somewhere that gnolls are just people turned into hyena people by the gnoll demon. Also the gnoll demon just makes em i think

>>51491448
I might add: the groups in my hometown were very big. It never bothered me that other players answered some rules questions, but I always listened in to make sure it was correct or to see if there was something I might add. There was never anything a player could do to make me angry, which might be why I wouldn't be aware of the effects of my own behavior.

>>51490648
None uses gnolls for raping female knights, unlike any other monster, idk why

>>51490387
In-character > out of character

If you disagree with that, you can go play Overwatch or DotA, or whatever the fuck it is you do in your free time, because it obviously tabletop roleplaying games.

>>51491581
>I'll use angry hyperbole! That's a good trick!
Anon, the entire example is laden with falsehoods and didn't even take the original post language into account, or how games go.
I have never seen a player blurt out "I roll diplomacy!" with no prompting or foreseeable purpose, and neither have you, or anyone is this thread.
That's why you are a fucking moron from the word go, and I called your bullshit what it is.

>>51489676
>I roll to attack
Okay, who and with what using what feats or spells or what have you
>lol dunno

>>51491611
>same post as >>51491014, and just as stupid, but thanks for the you, I guess

File: 1485646514262.png (44KB, 385x201px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 385x201px

>>51491581
This.

File: 1454906973586.gif (383KB, 826x580px) Image search: [Google]

383KB, 826x580px

>>51485208
I know some people say that anytime a monster is below half health, but you raise a good point.
As to the spells thing, the NPCs have whatever spells I say they have. Class is an abstraction, just like STR, DEX, HP, AC, and EVERY FUCKING OTHER ASPECT OF THIS GAME. The most annoying is when they ask what class EVERY SINGLE NPC is.

>>51485380
Players asking you to explain the mechanics of the monster are the absolute worst. The monster works however I want it to work, and I don't give a shit what the statblock you just googled says

>>51488788
My group actually had a mildly heated discussion about whether spell slots exist in universe. I'm glad to see I was on the right side of history there.

>>51489099
Oh, I love that. Do you have the greentext?

>>51489623
This shit is the absolute worst. If you're making the argument that people should be able to just "roll charisma" without putting any more effort in, you're a goddamn retard.
>Your turn, what do you do?
>I attack
>how do you attack?
>I swing my sword

>I roll stealth
>how do you stealth?
>I dunno. 24!

>I roll history to investigate the ruins
>where do you look? How do you investigate? What are you trying to recall?
>lol, dunno. I just roll arcana

This shit is BORING. If you let people do that on Charisma checks because they're too autistic to speak, you're setting up a horrible precedent for other areas of the game, and actively making things BORING. Eventually skills just become 'I win' buttons, and people will start trying to use the Arcana skill as a detect magic spell. I've seen this shit happen.

>>51489880
I don't have a huge problem with players guessing the AC

>>51490108
Brilliant.

>>51490306
It could be the GM punishing you, in which case she's a bitch. She shouldn't have had you roll for that in the first place if she wasn't going to let you do it. On the other hand, she might not have been intentionally targeting you. Instead of bitching on /tg/ you should ask her about it OOS.

>>51475081
Look, man, sometimes the DM throws some hard-ass bullshit at you and you need to break the roleplay and GAME.

Most recently, I had to do this in my sci-fi game by deliberately baiting out several enemy AAOs--I had the best armor and most health--so that a wounded teammate could carry a downed one through enemy lines to safety. Immersive? no. Tactically satisfying and effective? Yes.

>>51490108
>Works every time.
Until the player continues to freeze up, or blurts out something ridiculous off the cuff that a GM like you would use to punish them.

what is better, tg

>there is enemy camp
>I roll stealth and sneak into camp
>you got into a camp

>there is the enemy camp
>I hide inside the barrel and try to sneak into into camp
>you successfully sneaked past guards and now your barrel is next to main building

>>51491822
>a GM like you
Don't make tall assumptions buddy. If someone can't fucking tell something as simple as
>"I offer to pay half"
then he's getting some coaching. Some confrontational crybaby faggot that jumps to conclusions like you though would get the boot.

>>51491078
>It's a lot more interesting to have a brash and impetuous character try to haggle with a high-end professional or see the Paladin try and tell grouchy, uncaring merchant's about the nobility of their quest, rather than just automatically going with the one baseline action that makes more sense in context
See, I agree that it's fun when players try to approach a problem from different angles and experiment with alternatives, especially if they end up making fools of themselves because they didn't think it through, but I believe it's fair to say that they EXPECT you to "automatically go with the one baseline action that makes more sense in context" if they did not bother specifying.

>>51491607
Bitch, I have seen that exact thing go down. Don't tell me what I have and haven't seen. Your entire, shitty argument has been one, big presumption. Whether it's that the DM prompts the roll, that RPing it would take "five minutes", or that I'm just making shit up. It's almost like you think you're some sort of telepath. And you've been wrong every fucking time, because you're just pulling shit out of your ass in order to make your crappy reasoning seem correct.

But you're wrong, and you're digging yourself into an ever deeper hole, because you're trying to defend the position that roleplaying in a roleplaying game is bad, which you can't, so you're constantly building strawman arguments that you pull from thin air.

And I think you're just doing it for the sake of being a cunt, because you've been rude as fuck since your very first response.

>>51491882
Both are equally stupid. Second one can be fun tho

>>51491959
explain your reasoning

>>51491882
The latter because it grants a bonus to your sneak roll, duh, and you're going to need it since you're trying to sneak past several people.

>>51491959

Well one is dumber than the other.

Why would they just have an empty barrel supply stack at the edge of the base that gets moved, no question asked about the new weight, to the center of camp?

>>51491607
I had the following exchange with a player once.

>Player: does the pillar look magical?
>Me: No, it just appears to be a regular pillar
>player: Ok, I roll arcana to see if it's magical
>Me: How do you do that?
>player: [crickets, grinning like a moron]
>me: well?
>player: lol, I dunno
>me: well how are you trying to discern whether it's magical?
>player: I just said, I roll Arcana
>me: right, but what is your character actually doing in game?
>player: I dunno
>me: well you need to tell me how you're actually doing it
>player: wtf, why? I just said I roll arcana! I got a 14!

This was what made me realize I needed to be stricter about when I let people roll for things. This kind of shit can and does happen. I'm happy for you if it's never happened at your table

Open question to the thread: How do you get people to immerse themselves? I started cracking down on metagamey bullshit like this, and now the player basically does nothing most sessions. I mean, not too much changed, because before the only time they were involving themselves was to roll dice, but now they're just bored, and it's starting to get disruptive.

I kind of feel like they just don't know how to get involved. Anyone have any advice with this kind of thing?

>>51491882
Whichever one the player said to me.
Also,
>you got into the camp, and have taken post in a hiding sport near *insert location*
Now it sounds like something a GM would say, not a strawman.
>>51491941
>Don't tell me what I have and haven't seen
And why can't I?
You seem to be coming from this imperious position that I'm campaigning against roleplaying, when I am saying that demanding roleplay, especially if the player does not offer it, is overstepping the boundaries of a proper GM.
You can talk to the player later and find out if there is an issue, but the asinine position of "If you don't roleplay out your haggling with a merchant, you can't use the mechanics on your sheet!" is a gross double-standard used on social rolls that doesn't apply to any other type of roll. The only thing it actually does is allow people to flaunt their elitist attitude and scream ROLLPLAYER at others as tho they are better.
And no, I don't need to be nice to an obvious bleeding cunt like you. You have worn your shitlord, better than thou attitude on your sleeve since your first post.
Calling you out for being a twat has simply been a pasttime compared to having reasonable debates with >>51491928, >>51491078,
>>51491201, where we can disagree on gm style, but still be civil from the word go.

>>51492068
How would you try to figure out if something is magical? Like, it's not a real thing we can do?

>>51492054
I imagined he was going for the Solid Snake/Looney Tunes approach where he will try to lift the barrel and move closer whenever no one is looking.

>>51475105
>>51475081
Yeah, this would just set my alarm bells off and make me murder the quest-giver. Obviously he's trying to get us to steal this shit for him.

>>51492048
For a whacky campaign with kids, the barrel approach would work because it's fun, even if silly.

Whereas the saying "I roll stealth" is the peak of laziness

>>51492068
>This kind of shit can and does happen
Considering you said "roll arcana" and you are using detect magic, you are either playing 4e or 5e.
The skill entry in the book says succinctly that there is no built in elaborate spectacle, they can sense/see the magic. I would look askance at you if you asked me "how do you remember if you've seen this plant before" if I rolled nature in a forest, too, your question was the wrong turn of phrase.
No, it doesn't happen in my game, because I don't ask my players for dramatics when they aren't called for, they choose to supply them.

>>51492068

This looks like your player just doesn't know what to do.

The proper thing is to give them some examples. Say, "Well, you could study it for five minutes, using your wizardly eyes. Or you could pour a circle of salt around it to see if it resonates. Or you can approach it with another magical item to see if it causes any distortion."

Given that real-world me would have no idea how to tell if, say, a fork was magical, these are reasonable accommodations.

File: 5eg.jpg (60KB, 680x239px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 680x239px

>>51492198
Copy and pasted from the PHB
>Arcana.
>Your Intelligence (Arcana) check measures your ability to recall lore about spells, magic items, eldritch symbols, magical traditions, the planes of existence, and the inhabitants of those planes.
Dumbass

It's not asking for dramatics, it's asking the players to invest themselves in the campaign to some degree. You don't need to have a monologue about how you remember this plant from the battle of icevale, where it was used to cure the wounds of those injured in battle with the stone giants, for its medicinal powers are great, or whatever, you just need to explain what you're doing to me.

And your analogy is wrong
>hey GM, I want to look around for some healing plants
>ok, interesting, how do you do that?
>I roll nature
>Ok, but where are you looking?
I have no idea why you're acting like such a dick about this stuff, it's basic, GMing 101

>>51492178
Don't worry anon, most tabletop players have mind of a child, they won't notice it being below them

>>51492371
see
>>51492348
Also, nowhere in that does it say "player does xyz action to accompany their detect magic check", that was you adding it in at a poor time. What you should have asked him was for the result of his check, because that denotes whether he succeeds or fails no matter what he does.
>Ok, but where are you looking?
Anon, I'm going to lay some woodcraft on you: there is no "specific place" to find a plant in a forest or any such area it grows natively. You will either find it in the type of place my Nature check says it grows, in which YOU need to tell me where I will be looking, or it does not grow in the area at all, because you do not have random plants growing in places unless someone specifically planted it and tended to it to make sure it survived.
Your question would be responded with
>Where does my successful Nature check tell me to look, because it should cover it's typical habitats?
Yes, it is basic GM'ing to encourage the players to dross up what they are doing.
You have chosen 2 bad examples of it, however, that are not supported by the book or by any measure outside your own inscrutable desires.
Choose your spots, and make it known what you are looking for, and you get answers. My players routinely describe their combat actions in detail, and I got them in the habit by having them roll, and on a successful hit, asked them to describe what they were doing to others so that the pc group had an idea of how they fought. My group now works off each other's descriptions to build up to some fairly impressive combat pictures, and I didn't need to do a thing except describe their victims remains (sometimes).
tl;dr If you ask your player to describe something, and they respond with "wut", you fucked up somewhere.

>>51487499
Hell, they hadn't even seen the raping nor was it an imminent threat. They just found a village with a bunch of dead people. They investigated and came to the conclusion that everyone had been raped, pillaged, and murdered. Though not necessarily in that order.

>>51490108
I'm stealing this. I like this idea.

>>51492537
>If you ask your player to describe something, and they respond with "wut", you fucked up somewhere.
Really, getting a blank stare from your players when you ask them for details can mean a few things:

1) They have no idea how these tasks could be done because they have no experience in such a situation - detecting magic is the best example, but it could also be any expert skill or procedure that isn't often detailed in fiction.

2) Their imagined course of action is so obvious to them, they don't even understand what details they're supposed to provide. Maybe haggling to them automatically means "do that thing where you pretend not to be interested and threaten to shop somewhere else" and they did not even consider other options, or thought those would be fall under different labels ("intimidating the merchant" or "feeding him a sob story" is not "haggling")

3) They're idiots who aren't even imagining the situation at all and are playing a TRPG mechanically like they would a videogame - unless they have a reputation for idiocy this shouldn't be your first guess.

>>51492072
>And why can't I?
Because you're not a telepath.

>gross double-standard used on social rolls that doesn't apply to any other type of roll

See, this is where you stop having a reasonable argument and start projecting. I never said I don't let players make the roll. I said I ask what they say, in-character. That's not me saying they need to mirror their character's skill in real life, as your dumb ass is assuming. It's me saying I prefer in-character discussion when it's warranted. When the characters go out in town with a shopping list, I'm perfectly happy to wave it all away in a few minutes. When a player wants to get an expensive item for a better price, he has to do a *little* more than just announcing a roll without even telling me what it's for.

>where we can disagree on gm style, but still be civil from the word go.

You don't know what the word "civil" means. You made massive assumptions about a simple greentext post, all of which were wrong. You are projecting your own shitty logic into a strawman argument. You seem to me like the typical armchair critic: Quick to judge, slow to think, and turning every perceived inadequacy into a reason to drop even the pretense at civility because being an aloof cunt makes your dick hard.

And I genuinely doubt if you are even in an active game, because your argument is typical /tg/ autism that never actually happens in real life, but which the people who complain about it don't know, because they don't actually play these games in real life. I mean, your #1 reason to be a bastard? People being barred from using skills because they don't have that skill in real life? I've only ever seen that complaint on here. So, at best you're generalizing your own shitty experiences to others, which just makes you dumb. At worst, you're plain, old making shit up.

Of course, I would have been happy to explain away this misunderstanding, but you chose to be a cunt. I pity your players. If you have any.

>>51489676
"I rolled high on my check, so the DM should tell me what my character does."

Go back to Crit Role, millennial trash.

>>51490562
>>"I roll persuasion, I want to get a lower price"
>is to
>>"I want to get a lower price, I roll persuasion"
>All four statements need a method anyway.

Method: Talk

>>51490880
It's unnecessary. Six seconds of combat means you're not just swinging once to see if you hit. Have you ever seen an actual sword fight? Count to six while counting the number of sword swings that occur for one person.

>>51490888
>Quad-class min/maxer
>Third party class+illusionist gnome
>Custom race + Weird third party class adaptation+ level dip.
>Complaining that someone is playing a paladin and not some optimized conglomeration from 4 different splatbooks and homebrew.
Stop being a faggot and let a normal person play what they want.

>>51492068
I personally do not know anything about rock climbing but my character has a +14 to climb. Does that mean my character is unable to rock climb because I cannot tell you personally how to find handholds on sheer cliffs?
Or how I'm unable to figure out if something is magical or not because I personally am unaware of In-Universe arcana techniques?

>>51493277
Not him, but I would ask you for something like "I climb using the natural handholds" or "I climb using my picks" or "I climb using [other way of supporting self]"
and similarly I would like to hear "I look for signs of magical activity using my mana sense" or "I suspect it using some of my tools" or "I see if any of my magical instruments react to it"

The climbing stuff would give an Idea how hard it would be and what could happen (Picks break, your hand slips, you get tired more easily, etc...) and the arcana stuff would decide what you notice and what reaction happens

>>51493222
>>Complaining that someone is playing a paladin and not some optimized conglomeration from 4 different splatbooks and homebrew.
You're being a sarcas-
>>51491019
>With the right setup, he could still be salvageable, but my method involves some impressive optimizing, 2 flaws, 2levels of mystic knight, a shitton of ACFs, and ultimately becoming a saint, because a paladin saint is the most evil whooping thing out there.
Whoa. Can't you people play something normal?

>>51493363
>Whoa. Can't you people play something normal?
The paladin is the outlier to the group, not the other way around, and if you understand the mechanics of the game, then you would know why.
A 1-20 paladin is already a poor class with a lot of problems, and since you are so choosy, why I just play a straight cleric that can do literally everything the paladin does, but better, if I choose a certain god and a handful of self buffing spells.

File: identifying wood.jpg (68KB, 500x661px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 500x661px

>>51492068
>I roll arcana to see if it's magical
>How do you that?
>I pull out my magnifying glass and look at the pillar's grain to see if I can identity magic

Just kidding, optics are ridiculously overpriced in 5e

>>51493399
But if you're choosing between four different classes and picking feats that make no logical sense is he really a paladin anymore?

>>51493423
>no logical sense
>shit like extra smites, holy feats, power attack make no logical sense
Mystic Knight IS a paladin, a paladin that worships a specific god, and gains bonuses related to that god.
Saint is a template that basically makes paladins closer to their 2e incarnations with mechanical bonuses. I hold to the opinion that it should have been baked into to paladin's advances from levels 10-20, at level 20 becoming an actual angel.

>>51493277
>Does that mean my character is unable to rock climb because I cannot tell you personally how to find handholds on sheer cliffs?

I honestly have no idea where you faggots cross over from "describe what you are doing" to "hold a college level lecture about the subject.

The point here is synergy. If you describe the actions of your character as if he's really doing it, you prompt the GM to describe the world, leading to a more immersive experience. But simply stating your roll prompts the Gm to respond with a dry "you succeed".

It might just be a wall, but if you establish that you're climbing the old fortress wall using the space left by falling bricks, and the cracks created by an ancient assault, it's a much more personable experience than "you ascend 30 feet, roll again".

>>51493423
You must be new. It's almost impossible to make a characters that's both Effective and Simple without sacrificing one of the two.

>>51493474
>becoming an actual angel.
But angels lack free will in religion. Would that mean the character becomes an NPC under the (GM's) god's control?

>>51493481
Because the initial point was a DM who was holding up the game for what, in the long run, was a minor issue, using diplomacy to bring down the price of an item per the rules in using diplomacy.
I've played with GMs who would refuse a player their abilities if they didn't supply "roleplay" to go along with it in this exact instance, and I think it is against part of the spirit of the game to do such a thing. The player even admitted at the table that they had never actually haggled before, and didn't know how to proceed organically, but the GM refused to budge, and wouldn't allow the player to haggle the price down.
I feel it's disingenuous, on top of a waste of time, to ask for roleplay on rolls where it is not needed and the player doesn't provide it of their own volition. Not everything needs to be fleshed out always, and if the player wants to move forward with their action, why is the GM slowing down the game to prod extra sentences out.

>>51493514
What game lore are you talking about, anon? :^)

So basically you want a few words extra per action? That's reasonable.
>I attempt to haggle the price lower.
>I use the crevices to climb
>I swing my sword at it
>I use my magic vision on it.
>I sneak in at night

>>51493657
Can't speak for the rest, but yes
You don't have to describe what you do in full detail, because with most stuff neither I nor you will know it
but saying a general method is fine

>>51493657
>>51493689
see
>>51489623
This is what has been talked about.
According to this poster, and others in this thread, your way is wrong because you are not going into detail HOW you are doing it, only saying you want to achieve this goal via this act.

>>51493729
I cannot give you detail until I roll the result. It wouldn't make sense if I have an animated conversation about the price of rations but end up rolling a 6.

>>51493746
Tell that to the people in the thread who are insisting you describe what you are doing before you can roll the dice, it seems.

>>51490108
>"The shopkeeper agrees to your terms and lowers the price in exchange for you to blow him."
If he plays as a female character I don't see why he would be angry, rather it's an opportunity to get even bigger discount

>>51493729
I was stuck one with an autistic GM who while we set up camp, we split up workload.

Fighter was setting up the campfire, there was some snow and the ground. The GM held up the game for about 4 minutes, making the Fighter go into excruciating detail about how he set up the campfire.

Later when we were in town and we had a shopping list of things. A wagon and two animals to pull it being one of them. None of the players looked in the book to see how much those things would cost, and when we got to a place to buy these things, he refused to tell us the price and made us give a price, only after we had bought it and left town did he tell us how much they actually were.

>>51493811
Because that's demeaning and sexist?

File: 1455295751754.jpg (355KB, 819x1024px) Image search: [Google]

355KB, 819x1024px

>>51492537
>>51493277

Imagine if you were playing the new Zelda game, and there was no thought or skill required, you just pressed the buttons and Link solved the puzzles for you.

Imagine if in Game of Thrones, instead of detailing all the lines of bullshit that Littlefinger fed Ned, or the perils that Catlyn faced on her way to the Eyrie, the book just said "Little finger lied to Ned, and Ned believed it because the author needed him to for his plot to work out". And every single one of the books was like that.

Both of those would be incredibly unsatisfying experiences, because they ruin the illusion of immersion. You're constantly being reminded that Littlefinger and Ned and Tyrion are just words on a page, and that you're not Link, he's just a bunch of 1 and 0s.
This is literally the same exact fucking thing. Yes, at the end of the day you're 'just' rolling dice to determine whether or not a character succeeds or fails based on a given task. But the point isn't whether you can give a college based lecture, it's whether or not you can start to inhabit the role a bit, and help the other people at the table IMAGINE that they're in a living, breathing fantasy world.

That illusion is SHATTERED when the faggot next to you goes "I roll stealth", "I roll to hit with my sword", "I roll my nature check" anytime they want to do something. And then the murderhoboism starts.

You say that you have a group of players that do this stuff naturally. Good, I'm happy for you. My group DOESN'T, and there are a lot of people who are brand new to the hobby that don't realize that you should do that, because they're so caught up in the math and numbers and dice and paper and stats and holy shit how the fuck do you calculate AC

As far as I can tell, your argument is that you shouldn't make players describe what they're doing IC because they should already be doing that. Yeah, they should be doing that, and they're not, THAT'S WHY I'M MAKING THEM DO IT.

>>51493746
You can say that his stuff is overpriced and that you won't buy it unless he drop 20%, here failing means he calls your bluff and doesn't drop, succeeding is making his agree and give you discount

>>51493860
>you just pressed the buttons and Link solved the puzzles for you
This is the most ridiculous comparison I have seen in this thread yet, and if the rest of your post follows suit, I'm glad I didn't bother reading it.

>>51493831
>Later when we were in town and we had a shopping list of things. A wagon and two animals to pull it being one of them. None of the players looked in the book to see how much those things would cost, and when we got to a place to buy these things, he refused to tell us the price and made us give a price, only after we had bought it and left town did he tell us how much they actually were.
That's actually something that happens.
>"How much is this wagon/cow/horse?"
>"How much do you think it's worth?"
It's a common tactic to get people to overpay.

>>51493898
If you have to ask, you probably can't afford it.

>>51493222
Well the issue is i dont want him to feel worthless. I ended a dragon encounter with crushing sphere. He did like 16 damage i did 102d6. Also the thrallherd psi dominated the dragon. He was the odd man out in that we were built to kill the gods.

Its also a politics campaign in the manuevering a war shit.

Also the suubus is sooo op the gm failed to realize he should of kept la atleast a +4 but he decided to drop it to +2 cuz no wings teleport or summon.


Also anima mage is 1st party.

So is shadowcraft mage.

>>51493898
Maybe, but when we gave an IC reasoning, he wouldn't budge. One of the players said "My character was part of a farming family that had to buy wagons and such, shouldn't I have an idea of how much these cost" as that was part of the short backstory he gave the DM before the game, and the DM stuck to 'How much do you think it is?'

>>51493860
Now imagine you were playing a game like Fallout and wanted to go get some supplies from a shop. Instead of a clean menu you get a separate chat dialogue you can't skip through for each individual item. Then after you've gone through ten minutes of dialogue you have to go through five more minutes of price haggling mini games before you finally finish your purchase. Now you leave and completely forgot what you were doing because for the last 15 minutes you were discussing the price for Brahman steak sandwiches.

>>51493848
He's already a homeless murderhobo that lives of scavenging ruins, nothing demeaning in doing fair job for fair price. And I agree that it's sexist, where are all the female traders who would drop price you have sex with them

>>51493868
So what you're saying is that I have to have the same skill level OOC for diplomacy that my character IC has or else it won't work? Do you force someone to try and hit you with a stick every time they try to attack something?

>>51493882
Why is it ridiculous? It's Zelda so the puzzles are easy, right? Why not just streamline the process instead of wasting the player's time with pointless game bullshit?

>>51493944
Holy shit, you don't need to act out every line of dialogue you autistic retard. Literally no one in the thread has said that except for you. All that's being asked is that you give some detail about how your character is doing something or what they're using to accomplish the goal

>>51493931
>He did like 16 damage i did 102d6.
So what is an actual challenge in your game at level 7? Because from what I'm getting it's something on the level of killing 1d4 elder dragons/turn.

>>51490559
they're all good dogs after all

>>51494005
>Why is it ridiculous?
Your absurdium argument fails on face because you are comparing two mediums with completely different histories, user interactions, resolution mechanics, etc, as though they are actually comparable.
Hint, they arent, it's fruit to a vegetable, and falls apart because of it.
What you have succeeded in is making yourself look stupid all by yourself.

>>51494005
Is "I haggle the price" enough detail? Because otherwise I'll just intentionally stall the game by chatting up the shopkeeper for as long as possible because that's obviously what we came together this session to do. Not like there are more important things to do or challenges to complete.

>>51493971
You could try to make game fun by using brain at least somehow. What is the point of fucking roleplaying game if you don't want to roleplay in any way

>>51494050
Listen here faggot. I'll roleplay my character when it's appropriate. Like with the other characters or important NPCs. Discussing with a shop owner whether supplies are worth 4 silver coins or 5 is not important enough to merit a ten minute long in-character discussion with someone who has no importance to the story, is not around any other PC, and that I'll never see again for the entire campaign.

>>51494104
>it's not worth it
Then don't try to drop if you don't see it being worth it

>>51494046
Yes. Nobody wants to actually play this shit out, especially the GM.
What we're asking for is to not just roll your dice like a retard anytime you want to do something.

>>51494040
>a video game isn't a tabletop game
WOAH. WHAT.
That was the point you dense motherfucker. They're not the same, but the examples are equivalent. You wouldn't accept this kind of lazy bullshit from a video game or TV show, and you shouldn't accept it from the people that you're playing with either. You're there to create a universe with your minds, not to roll dice.

>>51494157
We'll what if I don't want to spend an unnecessary amount of time on something that, in the rules, should only take a few words and a skill roll?

>>51494157
>What we're asking for is to not just roll your dice like a retard anytime you want to do something.
>goes back up to the example that started this entire hubub
>>51489623
>"I roll Diplomacy"
>"..."
>"..."
>"What do you say?"
>"I try to get him to lower the price"
>"What do you say, to him, in character, in order to get him to lower the price?"
SURE SEEMS LIKE YOU WANT MORE THAN WHAT THE RULES CALL FOR TO COMPLETE AN ACTION AND MORE THAN WHAT YOU SAID YOU WANTED, FUCKFACE.

>>51482384
"""friends"""

I always wondered where are all those people that stay on phone/TV during roleplay and only turn to game table to roll their dice. But now I know where, on /tg/

What's the point of the diplomacy skill if I have to go through the entire diplomatic conversation anyways?

>>51494222
>SURE SEEMS LIKE YOU WANT MORE THAN WHAT THE RULES CALL FOR TO COMPLETE AN ACTION AND MORE THAN WHAT YOU SAID YOU WANTED, FUCKFACE.

3.x Diplomacy, RAW, breaks the game.

>>51494222
The rules sort of assume roleplay is the object of the game, faglord. Or are you one of those guys who's constantly OOC rattling off what the monsters should and shouldn't be able to do?

>>51494241
They don't act like that all the time, well all of them do, but I have no other friends

>>51494305

Then the problem is the system? In a more robust system with social skills, would you still demand that a talky character be an OOC master orator, or will the skillset of the character actually reflect what the character is capable of?

Because if the former, YOU are the problem, not the game.

>>51494222
Yeah, I want you to say something that would actually make the shopkeeper want to lower the price
>I roll an acrobatics check
>what are you trying to do
>I'm trying to swing to the other side of the balcony
>but there's nothing to swing from
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE NOT BY THE RULES TRIGGERED I SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO WHATEVER I WANT REEEEEEEEEEE
You can't do something if there's no way to accomplish it you partial birth abortion

Those two examples aren't even the same. In the first example the only thing specified is the end goal. In the second example you actually give a method of accomplishing the task. That's all that we're looking for
This isn't rocket science dude, Jesus christ. Just give some sort of details

>>51494370
>you still demand that a talky character be an OOC master orator

No, but I'd want them to have an idea of what they are trying to say. Maybe they're trying to bribe the guard, maybe they want a quid-pro-quo bargain, etc. Fucking give me something to work with beyond rolling a die for some success/failure state.

>>51482384
All of your NPC's are the same character senpai.

And you really should have banned X's character.

>>51489676
fine. you get a bonus or minus depending on how well you roleplay the social interaction. That way the roll still matters, but so does the context, a high roll can make a bad excuse passable for other reasons.

>>51494633

and vice versa with a bad roll but a well thought out argument/excuse/lie

>>51494021
The spells only big enought to fit a large sized dragon. I was just mostly lucky.

I get free extend on illusions and sphere foes 3d6 nonlethal a turn

>>51494657
Oh and i got a cl boost too i forgot to mention that

Also im level 8. But yeah crushing sphere is strong but wont work on anything bigger than huge.

>>51494392
>mechanic you're utilizing
>desired outcome
>roll

This methodology works for all iterations. You don't just say, "I cast fireball," you denote a target.
>Mechanic: casting a spell
>Desired outcome: an explosion of fire over there
>Roll: damage dice

Melee attacks
>Mechanic: combat rules
>Desired outcome: successfully put pointy end of sword in designated target, preferably removing many meat points
>Roll: Attack, followed by dmg on success

...so shouldn't social mechanics follow this same paradigm?

>>51494689
What game are you playing? Because it is obviously not the one I'm thinking of.

>>51494770
The fundamental issue is that you're omitting a critical piece that's baked into both your examples: The narrative process.
Fireball implies the process: Shit blows up.
Attacking with a dagger implies the process: Shank a nigga.
A diplomacy check doesn't imply the process in and of itself, so the player needs to either fill that in or permit the GM to narrate their own actions to them There's a load of ways to persuade somebody, and each is going to have different narrative outcomes.

>>51494803
It's 3.5 and the things he listed are why I don't play. Optimization range is way too wide such that you can have totally useless and totally unbeatable in the same game

File: 1456508759914.png (209KB, 397x295px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 397x295px

>>51494770
>he doesn't have characters narrate their attacks

File: when puppers attack.webm (3MB, 704x394px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 704x394px

>>51494039
>>51490559
>>51488044

>>51494839

I've always preferred roll-then-do. You determine outcome, THEN you act out what actually happened. It may be a bit less theatre-of-the-round, but there seems to be less disconnect between the ongoing narrative and mechanical play. It also encourages shy or unconfident types to take a stab at roleplaying, because the outcome's on the table regardless of what gobbeldygook comes out of their mouth. Takes the performance pressure off.

Honestly, if players roll a diplomacy check then they don't have to play Pawn Stars with every single NPC.

>>51494803
Oh and crushing sphere can be megated by disintegrate or dispel magic so if it had casting it really wouldnt of worked it was an adult dragon

>>51495006
Roll-then-do only works for players that "play fair". Many people, if allowed to choose their methods after knowing the result, will choose risky all-or-nothing methods when they succeed and safe methods when they fail.

My personal turning point on the issue was when a player had to roll to get past two guards. First one they rolled high and narrated how they simultaneously bribed and threatened the guard, making him let them through. Second one they rolled trash and narrated how they failed to convince the guard they'd forgotten their papers and insisted OOC that they should left undetained.

>>51495065
Because that TOTALLY makes it okay to do massive damage every round for basically free.

>>51495006
Better is intent-roll-do, when you state what you want to do, then you roll, after that played out

>>51495427

Right, that's the idea. You never just throw dice, you state what you're rolling for, the positive outcome you're seeking, and THEN throw dice. Determine outcome, play out the scene.

>>51493860
>That illusion is SHATTERED when the faggot next to you goes "I roll stealth", "I roll to hit with my sword", "I roll my nature check" anytime they want to do something.

>they're so caught up in the math and numbers and dice and paper and stats and holy shit how the fuck do you calculate AC

Sounds like you would get a lot more satisfaction out of playing a freeform/rules-light RPG, preferably diceless if you care about immersion so much.

>>51495479
You sound like someone who should rather play vidia games, since you don't want anything tabletop gives over them

>>51475081
>wait, those two spells aren't on the sorcerer list, what class is this guy again?
I think we'll all agree that spell lists are bad

>>51495502
I'm not the one frustrated that my gaming experience is "SHATTERED" by the system used and the way the other players react to it. You're literally projecting.

>>51495627
>You're literally projecting.

Is he sitting in your living room, holding a Powerpoint presentation about why you suck?

>>51495530
Not really. Could you, with a reasonable amount of time, come up with a few dozen spells without them being too weak, too strong, or easily exploited?
It's much easier to use established material and police your players. You are a GM of course?

>>51496053
Projecting means seeing your own problems in other people when those people don't actually have your problems.
Like when a divorced man sees a happy couple. He doesn't see their baby, or the way the guy seems completely devoted, or the casual flirting. He only sees that the dude looked at another woman for more than a second and deduced that their marriage is failing.

>>51495627
Of course you're not frustrated by fact that play tabletop as game about dicerolling, but does your ass goes on fire if PC states why he thinks why trader should lower his prices rather than simply rolling dicd like some of anons in this thread?

>>51496169
Yes, that's a figurative use of the word. LITERALLY projecting something means "to extend outwards", hence the word "projectile". In terms of the usage of "projecting" in mental issues, it's taking the meaning of projecting a picture onto a screen.

Point is, he isn't literally projecting. He's figuratively projecting. He's literally imagining other people are frustrated when in reality, he is frustrated.

Of course "projecting" is such a commonly used insult on /tg/ that half of the people who use it do so incorrectly, and most of the others are just bitterly accusing someone they might just as well call a "faggot" for all the worth their assessment holds.

>>51496353
>does your ass goes on fire if PC states why he thinks why trader should lower his prices rather than simply rolling dicd
No?

>like some of anons in this thread?
No one is saying they DON'T want to see others roleplaying. At most they don't want too much time to be wasted shopping for supplies and other trivial tasks, a sentiment which the "rollplaying = bad" crowd actually share.

>>51496519
>that's a figurative use of the word.
Not really, it's a specialized use of the word, which has become an accepted definition by this point.
It's like complaining that you're not LITERALLY mailing something to people unless it comes inside a trunk or was at least ferried by ship, and that you can't "post" a message without nailing it on something or having it carried along a postroad.

>LITERALLY projecting something means "to extend outwards"
Yes, as in he's extending his frustrations to other people.

>>51496142
>A few dozen
I'd rather make one spell with built-in metamagic options.

>>51497034
>which has become an accepted definition by this point.
If it was accepted you wouldn't get called a retard for using it wrong. I'm sorry but truth is not a democracy.

>>51497209
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

I used "literally" precisely because it was a rather blatant example of (psychological) projection and I wanted to make it clear that I'm not just abusing the term.

>>51493514
Funny, because I'm pretty sure rebelling against your given directives and telling God to shove it is an example of free will

>>51493971
Said like someone who has never been to a flea market/garage sale/etc.

How is "drop the price by 20% or I ain't buying" some obtuse arcane thing to you? Or are you complaining that you are somehow perplexed that someone could come up with such a skilled argument? What skill do you think a character would need to come up with that? Untrained? Untrained with bad cha and a flaw?

>>51497651
>Said like someone who has never been to a flea market/garage sale/etc.
The complaint is that the character shouldn't have to be handicapped by the fact that the player has never been to a garage sale, or swung a sword.

>Untrained with bad cha and a flaw?
See, "drop the price by 20% or I ain't buying" is precisely what I expect to hear from an untrained character with bad cha and a flaw, not from the party face who could have been commissioned to defuse international crises and negotiate the kingdom's trade deals according to his character sheets.

>>51497582
Well, the last angel who tried that isn't really an angel anymore now, is he? And of course, that's assuming he didn't rebel because he was ORDERED to do so...

The gift of free will is indeed what separates men from angels. Milton emphasises that although the former are still powerless to change Fate, they work towards it on their own volition, much in the same way that fictional characters act out a story regardless of the audience's desires. They are free to be unfree.

Angels do not even have that privilege of independent action/motivation; they do because they are told, not because they want to.

>>51497795
>See, "drop the price by 20% or I ain't buying" is precisely what I expect to hear from an untrained character with bad cha and a flaw, not from the party face who could have been commissioned to defuse international crises and negotiate the kingdom's trade deals according to his character sheets.
OK, so what do you expect to hear from the untrained player with OK-at-best cha and barely any information on the person he's trying to haggle with?

>>51498303
"I try to haggle with the merchant" followed by rolling for diplomacy or whatever.

>>51493811
Females bare the burden of the reproductive act so have evolved to be more picky about who they do it with and how often. I agree that shouldn't apply to blowjobs but it's the general attitude females have evolved towards sex. Therefore they don't see sex with anyone all the time as a positive thing, but a risk for no reward. For males sexual behavior has little to no risk and there is everything to gain.

>>51475081
my players count how much damage they've done to a target and it's infuriating

>>51491726
I like you, but I think people like you and I are forever going to be on the other side against people who want to justify a lack of roleplaying. 90% of the enjoyment for me is the tension and satisfaction of building a story through player actions. If a fight is just moving through mechanics until the enemy is dead then I see no reason to even bother with protracted fights at all, you might as well just have an algorithm that runs the fight for everyone based on the assumption everyone is just going to use the skills and abilities that are most effective for them. Asking players what their character wants to achieve and how they want to do that is essential to having players who think for themselves.

A good fight for me is another encounter between the players and the NPCs or monsters they are interacting with, and there should always be a reason for the fight which lends importance to what they choose to do and how they choose to do it. For me the result should never be simply you kill or be killed. Things like enemies running away or being captured to the PC's being made to yield themselves are often more satisfying for making the game go somewhere.

Some people just want to see a bunch of numbers go flying around until someone wins - which is fine. I've played all sorts of video games that are as basic as they come and are about seeing how well you can game the system, but when it comes to pen-paper rpgs I want fluff and character and roleplaying.

Also has anyone noticed that calling someone a shit GM means absolutely nothing now because it's thrown around so readily?

>>51497272
Shut his ass up pretty solidly.

Holy fuck nothing chaps my ass more than people thinking they have the plot/game/whatever all figured out and have to say it often interrupting shit.
>The captain looks uneasy as he clears his throat and looks towards you all
>Hes gonna fucking betray us i knew it!
>...
>He states that the navigator seems to be utterly lost in these waters as the landmarks do not seem to match the map
>Fuckin hell i knew it hes gonna try to trick us into life boats or some shit
>The captain says hes going to get a few to try to row to the nearest known landmark to try to find help
>OMFG i called it guys!
Worst one was i had a rebel leader addressing the crowd and trying to find people for a suicide mission and he wouldnt stop guessing every trope he could until i finally got to the suicide mission part and he just started saying SEE! and shrugging at the other players.

>>51493277
No, but if your character has various possible options for climbing (just like how we have many options in a conversation) you need to tell your GM whether you're using your grappling hook that nearly always works but is single-use, a rope you have 20ft of, a climbing spell you can cast twice a day, or nothing at all, because that will have consequences on the DC and on what resources you have available when and after climbing. What if you get attacked mid-climb or chased so you need to leave your used gear behind?

In >>51493746's example the GM HAS to know what method you're using, 'cause rolling badly and then going "uh, I was using the grappling hook actually, not the harder options" is nonsense.

You don't need to go into detail about how your character uses the grappling hook or what the maneuver for setting up a solid climbing rope is, just like how, when attempting a Persuasion roll, you don't need to be a good IRL orator. Ideally, your GM should handle this for you, and if you don't know your options but your character does, the GM should tell you about them.

Also don't listen to >>51493860, that's an awful comparison.

>>51497795
Have you never had a master strategist PC controlled by someone whose first reaction is to charge headfirst into battle? Or anything of the sort? Never had someone play a thief even though they don't know shit about the criminal world?

It's common for players to play PCs which are smarter, more knowledgeable or more persuasive than they are. Sometimes the player makes a bad decision because they don't know as much as the character does. So step in, tell the player what the options are and handle the details yourself.

If the party face IC roleplays "drop the price by 20%" when a high-charisma character could get a 50% discount with their skills, tell the player about it.