Shit you're tired of your DM or players doing? Doesn't

>>53695780
>Do you ride the suspect hard, or try to use a soft approach?
>I dunno, apply a bit of pressure, but not too much.
OK
>Do you search for traps, or try to make good time?
>We search a bit, but don't take too long.
I...
>Do you try and defuse the bomb, or just get out of there?
>I'll try and defuse it, but if it takes too long I'll run.
GOD FUCKING DAMN YOU COMMIT

>try to intimidate every npc not directly working with them
>automatically suspicious of every npc working with them

Every fucking game. It is either they automatically assume anyone that is on their side is out to kill them or they do shit like threaten to skin shop keepers and informants.

>>53695780
My group switched from 5e to PF over spring break, against my advice.
I decided that hey, I know this system inside and out, I'll help everybody build characters over spring break. Had the GM send everybody my contact info with an open "anytime is fine".
Nobody took me up on it. Ok.jpg.

First session of PF, three people have to make characters on the spot, one winds up playing their 5e character unported. DM bitches that I have a +24 to stealth at level 4. Am told to change my character. Ok.jpg.
Third session of PF, two people in the group have complained to me about balance because they don't like their character. The rest of the group is complaining about the Summoner. 5e character still not replaced with a PF character.
Most recent session, two months of play. Person who was playing a 5e character has another player help make a PF character. I'm utterly unsure why I wasn't asked to help TWO FUCKING MONTHS ago. Rogue player is bitching to me about his inability to fight gud without blowing all his feats, still doesn't want to do chargen with me. GM runs a 4-hour combat that we don't even finish because there's four (FOUR) NPCs, a dozen enemies, and half the spells the NPCs are casting have to be looked up.

I just fucking wish people would call on me for help with chargen, because I can actually help DO shit. I don't know if they all thought "Oh, 5e character was easy, PF will be easy too oh shit" or if they're just lazy or what, but it's pissing me off that nobody's using the resource I'm offering.

>>53695989
Alternatively, this just recently happened in my game.
>I would like to try and drag these heavy objects out of the way.
>They are pretty heavy for you, make a strength check.
>It's shit.
>It's a struggle, it'll take you about an hour, but you finally manage to clear the path.
NOW HOLD ON THERE, BUCKO. Maybe I don't want to spend an entire goddamn hour in the midst of danger to perform some action that clearly I'm struggling at. Maybe it only takes me a few minutes to realize that this is a poor use of my time?

In your example, your players are reluctant to commit to any one course of action, although in some cases, it might be because there's nothing compelling them to commit and they're seeking some "better" compromise, in their minds. In my example, the DM's narrative commits my character's actions for me, and the result is I'm even dumber than usual!

>>53695780
Every combat is a deadly combat, and then the GM acts surprised when everyone almost dies. "This should be appropriate for your level though... " IT'S. NOT. Every fucking chart says it's not. It's not cool or fun when every time, you need to retcon shit so it's not just a TPK on some theoretically inconsequential fight. Also, adding insane terrain limitations INCREASES THE DIFFICULTY! Christ.

>>53695989
"If you want to be sure to escape the blast, you have to run now. But, the bomb isn't defused yet. What do you do?"

>>53696053
>I threaten him with my axe!
>Ok, he looks suitably terrified.
>Does he like me?
>...no, of course not, you just threatened to kill him.
>Wh...

File: ypl4u.png (851KB, 1088x898px) Image search: [Google]

851KB, 1088x898px

>>53695989
>Do you ride the suspect hard

Double checking everything.

You rolled a 2 for perception, stop trying to reroll until you get a 20+

>>53696557
>npc spells have to be looked up
jesus fuck that's stupid.

The players are worse. Why do people show up without characters ready? The worst I've had is when they forgot to pick something (like oh I forgot to spend my skill points/use my starting gold, I'll do it while you do the introduction)

>>53696709
Roll it for them if the start doing that. Or just roll for the thing they're trying to find, and use their passive perception scores.

>>53696907
I'm not the GM.

If I roll low I just truck on.

>>53696709
I keep the players on some sort of clock or facing some threat to avoid this. Sure, you can spend another ten minutes recheckng the room. I'll go ahead and roll for random encounters while you make your perception check.

>>53695989
Anytime I had players who did this, I made their lack of commitment bear consequences, and that's gotten those players to stop with the whole "we check for traps but only if it's not gonna take too long" shit. That's metagaming; rarely, if ever, do you know 100% if a task is going to take too long when you start it (especially searching/investigating shit). So if you're all just trying to debate out-of-game how long it's going to take searching for traps before you get caught by whatever the DM is planning, then you're god damn right you're all taking too long and the kobolds get wise to all that annoying whispering outside the door.

They've gotten better about just saying "we search for traps" instead of trying to debate what I'm planning to do. The game goes faster, and there's a lot more action and adventure to be had.

>>53696709
My DM keeps doing the opposite of this. If we fail a roll he starts coming up with every possible way or reason we might reroll it, because his railroad relies on us passing the checks he comes up with, so if I just decide "I'll stick with that low result" he gets annoyed.

>>53695780
>Shit you're tired of your DM doing?
Running 5e.

>>53697745
As opposed to what? 3.5? 2e? >not playing D&D?

>>53697791
Anything that isn't whatever the newest D&D edition is, yeah. He utterly refuses to try any other system because he has decided that D&D is perfect for every game.

>>53696661
It's been more or less like this with our group for the past couple months. Naturally, our party paladin has lead us on a personal quest into the Underdark, where every encounter is an existential struggle, every NPC is a liar, and every hallway, every door, every room and every creepy statue in it is a trap. My GM has literally said that they plan encounters with the expectation that we'll die, and then we just consistently rise to the occasion. And those kinds of encounters are fun in moderation, but not like this! Thankfully, it's never been so bad that we've needed to retcon anything, although we've had a pretty powerful DMPC around with us for a while now, which I'm sure just fucks up the encounter balance even more.

At this point, I'm not even sure why I show up. I know I'm somewhat new to TTRPGs, only having started playing a few years ago, and I've heard that older, classic dungeon crawls were like this, and I don't feel like I've missed out on anything. There are only so many months that you can impose a persistent sense of danger and being in over your head with nearly no relief in sight before tension just dissolves into indifference. I don't really feel into it anymore, and my character realistically has no motivation to stick around in this place, since the booty-to-danger-ratio is completely out of whack. At this point, if things don't change, I think I'm just going to play things out to their logical conclusion (death or leaving the party), and then excuse myself from the game.

>>53696709
>stop trying to reroll until you get a 20+
Best thing about 5e is the added passive perception.

>>53696557
W-why would anyone switch from 5e... to Pathfinder? What advantages are there?

>>53696709
If my players are rolling dice, it's because there's a situation happening that requires a one-time roll to dictate chance. If they could spend all night re-rolling for 20s, then why even bother having them roll in the first place? In that case you just say "fuck it, you succeed" and move on.

>>53695780
>DMing a high level campaign, 5e.
>High level enemies are meat point central, their health is super high (and so are the players).
>Almost every round consists of "He's not dead yet?" and "How is he not dead yet I hit him 3 times!?" and "Why do these guys do so much damage?!"
>These guys have never played a high level campaign, where everyone has tons of meat points and you stab eachother with magical +2 damage swords till everyone dies from paper cuts.
>But they just keep saying this shit every single combat, you think they'd learn that enemies have more than 20 HP by now.

File: 1496860100682.png (832KB, 1056x1259px) Image search: [Google]

832KB, 1056x1259px

>>53695780
>players
Everyone and their mother being a spell caster. Just once I want to play something that isn't a martial class.
Secretly playing evil characters then being butthurt when they get called out IC for it
Stop being a pouty bitch when you roll a 1, just say your number and be done with it.
>DM
read the fucking rules, its cool if you want to home rule stuff but don't just make shit up on the spot.

>>53695780
>>Every single NPC is a chilled out, quippy, 'lol so random' goof ball
>>But they're all guaranteed to be "secretly" a bad ass

Adding to that

>DM takes everything you say to an NPC to heart as if you were mouthing off to his PC or something and you cant RP naturally with NPCs anymore unless its all flowers and rainbows.

>>53695989
>I dunno, apply a bit of pressure, but not too much.
"He's put off guard at first but gradually comes to doubt you're going to follow through."
>We search a bit, but don't take too long.
"You waste a few minutes but don't find anything in your cursory check."
>I'll try and defuse it, but if it takes too long I'll run.
"It's doubtful you'll make it in time if you start defusing but give up."

>>53696656
"How tough would it be to drag these heavy objects out of the way?"

>PCs doing evil shit left and right then claiming to be Neutral.
I mean, you dont have to sacrifice babies to the nightmares beyond the human ken to be evil, if you have no scruples hurting others for your own gain and repeatedly make egocentric choices, you're it.

>>53697894
DM didn't like how 5e didn't feel as "heroic", apparently due to the smaller numbers involved.
I said, flat out, that it'd make the newer players unhappy since PF is new-player hostile. New players are unhappy. I was right, I'm sad I was right, the world turns anyways.

Everyone's character is either
>my exact personality, but also an attractive elf who everyone loves
or
>total psycho murderhobo who everyone loves (even when he's murdering merchants over prices)
None of my players can roleplay, and it's fucking tiresome.

>>53698056
Alternatively
>being constantly suspicious because I made my character LE
I'm not going to stab anyone in the back, I'm Lawful. I just want to be a dwarf who makes bad deals with surface dwellers and dwarfs them out of their money.

>>53697894
Pathfinder has more than 3 books of content and rules for things besides combat.

>>53698077
>rolling an assload of dice for functionally no reason
>other than to roll an assload of dice
>this is "heroic"
I apologize if he's your friend or brother or something, but your DM sounds like a stupid toolbag.

File: 1443475759079.jpg (106KB, 603x707px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 603x707px

>>53698092
>dwarfs them out of their money
u cheeky cunt

File: 1480134657550.jpg (161KB, 960x850px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 960x850px

>Plays Chaotic Neutral.
>In every, single, campaign.
>"I'm just out for myself lol"

>>53697944
>Everyone and their mother being a spell caster
There's 7 people including whoever's DMing in my group, and there is never more than two full casters at any point cause everybody gravitates towards fighter or ranger
Last game there was just a warlock for casters ( I was DM)
This time there's a wizard and a sorcerer (I'm the wizard, the warlock from before is DMing and the sorc is the barb player trying something new)
I fuckin wish they would play something other then martials, sometimes I want to play beefcake mcsmash too

>>53695780
I was in a group of all new players with a Gm who decided to actually scream when a character was angry. Instead of being immersed, everyone got tense and confused. If a DM's going to do some wild role playing shit, don't surprise brand new players with it.

>>53698092
That's also good, although in my perspective if a character like this will ever find himself dwarfed out of his money by a surface dweller, there is a real chance he will stab someone in the back or hire the stabbers -- so some amount of suspicion might not be misplaced.
LE is unstable when not placed in a position of power is another way to say it.

>>53698158
To be polite to him, he's better at GMing than he is at D&Ding.

To be blunt, he's fairly mechanically inept. I honestly think he'd look at the Paizo Iconics and say "Yeah, those look well made".
He's a good GM when he's not getting blindsided by mechanics he should have known, though.

File: REEEEEEEEE.jpg (4KB, 250x211px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 250x211px

>>53698208
>Gm who decided to actually scream

>>53698194
>never more than two full casters
Last game I played we had two full martial and everyone else was a full caster except for a friend trying the artificer. No one picked up cleric either, which at least that can be mitigated via potions.
Hopefully you get to play a low int barb one day, its pretty fun.

File: WhiteGirlAwareness.jpg (49KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 640x480px

>>53698242
All the players after the Gm screamed

>>53697944
Homogeneous groups are perfectly fine

PCs never, ever trust each other, and mostly with good reason. Everyone is either a dick, or does backstabbing stuff behind each other's back.

I'd like just one ongoing game, where the we don't have to have Batman contingency plans in each other's pockets.

>>53695780
DMs and players that have played for months or even years yet neither know nor follow any of the rules despite owning more books and related materials than anyone at the table. It's not even badwrongfun wacky hijinks, it's just autism, uncompromising stubbornness, incomprehensible autism, disgusting arrogance, and insane beyond all reason autism. These people have often been the majority in my groups it is something I cannot escape. I've gamed in-person and online, in my hometown and across the country, with every ethnicity, age group, gender, sexual orientation, political affiliation. What sins have I committed in a past life to deserve this? I'd even be willing to sit at a table in hell if it meant I could get a cohesive game going. All this and escalating personal problems has forced me to progressively give up gaming as a whole. Now all I have is a little bit of sanity here and there to vent to you elegen/tg/entlemen.

>>53698077

>The DM doesn't know about the high power fantasy rules in the DMG such as 5 minute rests, healing surges, and cleave rules.

Amatuerhour.jpg

>>53697894
character creation options

thats about it

File: damn young people.jpg (83KB, 540x668px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 540x668px

>>53697928
TBF TO INEXPERIENCED GUYS IT IS FUCKING DUMB

>>53698609
>have a group of 7
>we play 5e
>I'm the only one with a physical copy of a book
>also the only one who knows the rules

>one of my players wants to dm
>say yeah, I want to play
>he doesn't know the rules
>end up backseat dming the rules for him
>actually works pretty well since he knows just enough to make it not annoying
>my character in this campaign was a professor before becoming an adventurer, has all the knowledge skills
>teaching players IC and OOC

It's fun at times

>>53695780
>So my characters made
>Cool, send it to me for review
>Ok

And then they vanish from the face of the earth.

>>53698602
Restrict the alignments to LG, NG, CG. You'll basically have to treat this like a company trust exercise where the DM puts the players in various situations that have to be solved through teamwork.

>>53698764
Unless you give them more of a reason to be good other than "Good is written on your sheet" they aren't going to be good

File: centrist man.jpg (46KB, 539x402px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 539x402px

>>53698056
Neutral is a fucking idiotic alignment for boring assholes anyways. It always ends up evil because it means they steal, lie and kill all the time
but it's for their own gain so they think it's okay? Because it isn't a Demon Lord's idea I guess? It doesn't matter why you do evil shit, it's still evil, including inaction/neglect.

"If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality."

>>53698731
I'm sorry if I did not make it clear, but what separates my circumstance from yours is that even if I were to offer advice to the DM, it would be brushed aside without second thought. But yes, it was great wonderful fun those handful of times I had a novice aspiring DM who did listen.

>>53697745
5e is pretty solid. What's your complaint with it?

>>53697835
:/ That sucks man. Have you tried bringing it up with the GM, or the group?

>>53697928
Is it really that bad at high levels? And have they not figured out group tactics or something?

>>53698056
Have them find Wanted posters for their characters in-game, describing their crimes and the effects it had. :D

>>53698084
How do they pen their own popularity into your setting??

>>53698179
Had somebody like this in my college group, always played the same selfish dickhead regardless of race and class.
>I just want money and gear
>I'm Chaotic Neutral, so that means I never do anything for anyone
At the start of a new game, he made a CN elf rogue (to no one's surprise). One of the other players rolled up a Lawful Good paladin and played it totally straight, digging into everyone's characters for not being as righteous as they had the potential to be. Obviously, this meant he was constantly admonishing the CN character for his attitude and actions.
>All the riches in the world won't matter if you're alone when you die
>I'm convinced you're allergic to altruism
>I thought you elves were above petty things like material wealth
Unlike the rest of the group, though, the CN player was clearly taking it personally, so the paladin player backed off on him. In-character, he decided nothing he could say would ever get through to the hopeless rogue. Eventually CN performed an outright evil act by secretly betraying the party for the promise of double the reward money on a bounty. Once this came to light, the paladin got fired up and called him out:
>I had hoped you better than this, rogue
>But now I see you truly only care about yourself
>Draw your sword and face justice, you worthless scum
CN player said "nope, fuck this," packed up and left. I saw him around campus but he never came back to our group. Paladin player felt bad about it, too, said he really didn't think the guy would react so negatively to being called out after straight up "Game of Thrones"-style betraying everyone.

I think the people who play the same character all the time are playing some weird ideal self, and it's actually really sad when it's always a dickweed loner.

>>53696752
amen to that brother
theres another player in a game im in. he didnt do his level up for FOUR levels. still didnt do it

>>53696656
>they're seeking some "better" compromise, in their minds
What's the fucking alternative? "Oh, there's a challenge here, but I assume you use the best compromise? Roll the dice." Get your head ass outta here.
>>53698034
That's what I've been doing, but they get MORE wishy-washy or drag even the most trivial actions into "Now I check the door HINGES. No, the TOP DOOR HINGE first." minutiae.

>>53697944
agreed on the dm part, a good mastery of the rules is need to keep the flow going

>>53698725
It's all in how you describe it or visualize hitpoints, IMO. If every hit is a severed arm or shattered skull, yeah, it's moronic.

But if you think of combat damage more as the minor injuries and exhaustion that wear someone down before the killing blow, IMO it's much more reasonable.

Also lets you avoid nonsense like sleeping off that severed arm you got in the last fight.

>>53698764
>>53698792
Well it was two games of Exalted, one game of Rogue Trader, and one game of Mutants and Masterminds. None of the systems have aligments.

Maybe you are right and I should stick to a good old fashioned D&D someday.

>>53698849
>including inaction/neglect
With you up 'til this point. The whole point of a Neutral alignment even existing is to illustrate that not being Good doesn't instantly make you Evil.

>>53698849
I dunno man, I rolled a True Neutral bard that was part of a Performing Troupe/Information Brokers that lived by a code of Liberty for All. He hated oppressive groups good and evil, and he was at his core self serving, but he had his own morals he lived by and would die for his friends. Neutral doesn't have to be boring, people just play it that way.

>>53696053
Could easily just be your GMing. Players will usually only act that way if they've gotten used to every NPC being an asshole or out to kill them, and if you try to "punish" them for it they'll just act that way even more as you're validating their fears. They'll probably stop if they notice that the majority of people they're trying to intimidate are just normal, helpful neighbors.

>>53699216
>He hated oppressive groups good and evil he was at his core self serving, but he had his own morals he lived by and would die for his friends.

sounds like textbook chaotic neutral tbbqh

>>53698905
>Is it really that bad at high levels? And have they not figured out group tactics or something?

From what I've gathered, yes it's that bad at high levels, considering that enemies around CR 9 and 10 have more than 100 HP, so it's basically just stabbing at a guy until you can get his HP down. Though high level spells and magic weapons and increased ability scores do help, I now understand what some fa/tg/uys mean when they talk about enemies having meatpoints. Because everyone has high health, especially if you're playing a tank, then it's basically just punching eachother with various attacks until one of you dies.

Next session I'm going to use the enemy rules for mass combat and have the players fight a small brigade of enemies, and restrict the meatpoint guys to big bad monsters.

>>53698908
good riddance, elf rogue was a dick

File: 1490230468867.jpg (50KB, 749x477px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 749x477px

>>53698849
>waaah why doesn't everyone play into my false dichotomy like a fucking tool waaaah

neck yourself.

>>53697731
Tell him that if a check NEEDS to be passed for the story to progress, it shouldn't be a check and you shouldn't have to roll.

>players put off leveling characters all week
>players saying they don't have time to pick feats while literally on a headset with me playing video games
>no rollplaying, but not much roleplaying either.
I honestly enjoy our casual atmosphere as it takes a hell of a lot of pressure off of me as a DM but calling each other by PC names every once a while wouldn't kill ya.

>>53700121
Who are you quoting?

File: wowthanksasshole.png (137KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 250x250px

>>53700161
I did and he didn't take it well.

File: neutral.jpg (9KB, 225x172px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 225x172px

>>53699149

>not being Good doesn't instantly make you Evil

this only works when Good has control, if Evil rules and you are powerful yet decide to do nothing you are Evil, too

you can only ignore small problems for selfish reasons, people being murdered you can't ignore or you are complicit and Evil

>>53700121
typical Neutral player here

>>53699216
that's cool and all but it sounds like he was Good with a side of greed. Also if a gov is "oppressive" it is evil. Yeah, 'good' gods don't burn heretics at the stake and ban dancing and singing and force children to marry adults. That's just evil pretending to be good. You were a Classic Han Solo type good guy.

>>53695780
>Your players
Pausing the game to whine about [thing] when they were told they'd be [that exact thing] before characters were even made

Also policing other players. Knock it off

>your DM
Not existing so I don't have to GM for once

>>53699285
I agree with this dude

Make a lot of helpful nice NPCs who are just trying to help instead of edgy spies and assassins all the time dude

>>53700419
Still not true. Doing nothing while other people commit Good makes you Neutral. Doing nothing while other people commit Evil still makes you Neutral. Doesn't matter if it's jaywalking or murder; you are literally doing nothing. That's what being Neutral is.

>>53700419
>you can only ignore small problems for selfish reasons, people being murdered you can't ignore or you are complicit and Evil

So how much of your time and money are you donating to make third world countries less shitty, or are you just another Evil guy?

File: 1474776796868.png (67KB, 314x316px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 314x316px

>>53698179
>hearing "haha, it's what my character would do!" several times a session

>>53695780
>not spending XP
I swear, I just killed a PC in a WoD game, because I have figured that by now he'd be able to tank anything short of AA rounds, but the chucklefuck hadn't spent any XP since the game started five months ago. He has done it in many games the past year, but this time died with almost 100 XP unspent.

There's one player who refuses to let NPCs be dramatic or withold any information. I'm not the DM, but I can clearly see that we're supposed to get the quest hook, find clues on our own, then go in and still be slightly surprised by what exactly we find in there. Don't cross-examine every NPC we meet, man. RPGs are interactive stories, sometimes stories are better when you let a narrative exist instead of acting like there will be real-world repercussions if you don't minmax every aspect of the game.

>>53700419
the ruling cases and the perspective of the neutral individual dont live intertwined.
good or evil dont rule in vacuums outside their planes.

One can be completely uncaring of the murders going on in town--being neutral and letting the guardsmen who are paid to do their job do it, be good and actively pursuing murderers, or be evil and actively murdering.

I'm worried about the current mission to go do yada yada, the fact that some serial killer has surfaced seems to be someone elses job, maybe a paladins.

>>53697853
>5e is the added passive perception.

>moshi moshi, baito desu

File: autistic networking.png (335KB, 742x599px) Image search: [Google]

335KB, 742x599px

>>53700595
If your neighbor beats their children every night but cooks a mean burger at BBQs staying out of it and not trying to stop it/report it is EVIL

“The hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who remain neutral in times of great moral conflict…[an individual] who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it” – Martin Luther King Jr.

Fucking Neutral players. If you walk by a mass grave only to steal their gold teeth instead of using your might to put a stop to it you're evil.

Selfishness IS evil.

Neutral isn't a third way, selfishness and greed are LITERALLY one of the oldest sins in every single religion for good reason. Allowing torture, rape and murder when you could stop it is evil, there's no argument to be had here.

Dietrich Bonheoffer, a murdered priest during Hitler's rule said, “Silence in the face of evil is evil itself. Not to speak is to speak, not to act is to act.”

>>53700651
attempting to reduce suffering in the world is important to me aye

>>53700999
Words are meaningless, what have you actually DONE to reduce suffering in the world?

>>53695780
Players
>character name is a joke, pun, reference, or ISP name written backwards
>bitch about consequences
>"Sorry, I can't make it" the day of a session
>get pissy when someone is more powerful than them in some way
>make absurd plans and get mad when they don't pan out
>interrupt me mid-description to go ackshually
>anything that is out of the ordinary is hilarious to them, no exceptions
>can't remember any names, even if they're common, modern day, and monosyllabic

GM
>Every single NPC has a personality that starts and ends with 'smug'
>Not a single NPC reacts to things like a normal person does
Example:
>Cut off an enemy's arm
>He reacts ominously "You shouldn't have done that"
>It's literally just a low-level cultist henchman

>>53700971
So then, should a paladin who enters such neighborhood slay said neighbor who beats their children, then slay everyone on the block save the children for permitting the beatings, then slay any of the children who didn't speak up against the abuse for supporting the beatings?

>>53700971
and I'll add I'm talking about TTRPG morality, because applying game logic Good Evil and Neutral in real life is fucking retarded, but the Problem of Neutrality has been discussed at length over and over and there's plenty of places to read more

In terms of RPGs, you are playing a character with POWER to change things and you choose to play a character that just wants to get paid? how fucking boring can you be. and it always seems to be Rogues/Bards and "alien" races trying this shit to get away with doing whatever they want at the table

>>53700971
>If your neighbor beats their children every night but cooks a mean burger at BBQs staying out of it and not trying to stop it/report it is EVIL
Wrong.
>“The hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who remain neutral in times of great moral conflict…[an individual] who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it”
Wrong.
>If you walk by a mass grave only to steal their gold teeth instead of using your might to put a stop to it you're evil.
Wrong.
>Allowing torture, rape and murder when you could stop it is evil, there's no argument to be had here.
Wrong.
>“Silence in the face of evil is evil itself. Not to speak is to speak, not to act is to act.”
Unbelievable doublethink and also wrong.

If all this were to be true, then show me what exactly would make a character Neutral. "Good but not Good enough to satisfy my moralfaggotry" answers need not apply. "Claims selfish motivations but still ends up doing Good at the end of the day" answers also need not apply.

>>53701026
Gave my kidney to an unrelated person, donate money and blood (not anymore, kidney), always there to talk to for my friends/family, cared for elderly grandmother until her death, comforted my sister after a really bad thing happened to her and so forth since you want to know so badly.

are you just a cynical lazy asshole bringing your shitty take on human life into ttrpgs?

>>53701030
>interrupt me mid-description to go ackshually
Oh my god, this. I was describing how it was weird and a little unnatural that a city that was destroyed less than a full lifetime ago had zero corpses in it, but one player decided to interrupt me saying it was totally normal, and then went online to look it up to prove me wrong after me telling him straight out that it's unnatural and to shut up

File: 1451420862745.jpg (51KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 600x600px

Protip alignmentfags:

Neutral doesn't mean the exact center of the alignment scale, it means not far enough in either direction to ping on the alignment radar.

Some neutral people tend towards doing good, some tend towards doing evil, but unless they start getting into the proverbial big leagues, they aren't gonna get that scale tipped far enough for it to matter.

>>53700971
So by your own logic, you're full-caps EVIL since you're spending time posting on 4chan instead of doing charity work or joining the police?

>>53701079
>what exactly would make a character Neutral

Nothing, it's a stupid alignment which is the entire point

you end up silently complicit with whoever has the most power.

All that it takes for evil to triumph is for 'good' men to do nothing.

>>53701079
WRONG

>>53701056
paladin can give the death penalty only: retard edition

>>53701161
>I donated a redundant organ, bodily fluids my body produces for free (but not anymore once that would start actually having an effect on my life), some nebulous, unspecified amounts of money most likely for tax purposes, and... uh, oh, right! I'm nice to my family members!
Nah.

>>53701189
>everyone is either Good or Evil and everyone less Good than me is Evil
Fuck right off, adults are talking here.

>>53701079
A True Neutral character would only be concerned with his life and goals, he wouldn't be an "I'm only out for myself and fuck everyone else" that CN is.

I do agree that the examples listed aren't exactly true, if you don't have the power to stop something then you're not exactly evil. You don't exactly have the power to stop an army by yourself, and the neutral thing is to escape or hunker down and hope for help from an outside source.

For example: a good character would lead innocent people across the underground railroad to safety, but a neutral character would let the people fleeing stay in his basement (but only because he knew and was friends with the good character).

Neutral is you average salary man, content to focus on their life and not much else.

>>53701185
this may surprise you but rl and ttrpgs are separate

human health is more complicated than HP may suggest for instance

File: that's my bait.gif (394KB, 769x819px) Image search: [Google]

394KB, 769x819px

>>53701231

>>53701178
That reminds me, I forgot one

>describe something that intentionally is strange and unnatural
>players realize this is unnatural but think it's a mistake on my part rather than an intentional oddity

One time they were fighting an android and after I described how he was seemingly being wounded bloodlessly, one of my players looked at me like I was retarded and felt the need to explain to me that people bleed when they're shot.

>>53701231
>(but not anymore once that would start actually having an effect on my life)
I am reasonably sure what he meant about the >(not anymore kidney) is that the rules of who is and isn't allowed to donate blood don't let people with only one kidney donate. I don't care enough to try and look up why the rule is there, but I assume it's there for a reason, along with all the other things that can disqualify you as a potential donor.

>>53701184

Best example I've played with is a TN fighter who just wants to kill a god. Stuff done along the way is just a work up to said killing a god.

They'll willingly get pulled into various do gooder deeds, because they like the party, but they aren't going out trying to right the wrongs and save all the people.

Nope, they just like killing bigger and badder things, and the party is a means to that end.

>>53701231
What an absolute edgy cunt. Bait or not you should just remove yourself.

>>53701232
>A True Neutral character would only be concerned with his life and goals, he wouldn't be an "I'm only out for myself and fuck everyone else" that CN is.
I don't know why you're bringing up TN vs. CN because that's not relevant here. Both TN and "CN" as you've described are valid TN: when the "fuck everyone else" involves committing acts of aggression, that's Evil; when it doesn't, that's Neutral.

>>53701249
What I've been describing so far is literally how Good, Neutral, and Evil alignments are formulated in systems that use them. You can moralize about it but be honest: you're really just butthurt at people not playing the way you play.

>>53695780
Is your DM Anthony Burch?

>>53699285
>>53700575
It is more the other dms in the group. I joined a group that has been together for 15 years about 10 years ago.

Every time I build trust, the other dms destroy it in theirs.

>>53701341
I was pointing out the difference between selfishness and greed actually being CN unless you're harming people in a serious way (stealing their fancy plates, as opposed to murdering them)

I was talking about it because the post he was responding to talked about how selfishness and greed fall under being "evil"

>Characters of the opposite sex of the majority of the party always screw us over (Not literally.)

>>53701473
How does the difference between selfishness and greed have anything to do with the axis of Law and Chaos?

And now we argue about alignments.

Well this thread is dead.

>Player starts an alignment debate

>>53701189
If we're talking about real life morality, then alignment doesn't apply. If we're talking about D&D morality, stick to their definitions. There is no good and evil without bullshit.

File: 1470024761876.jpg (82KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 800x800px

>>53695780
Players
>The one who complains OOC every time someone gets angry IC at his character's dickitry (Attacking other PCs for insulting his honor, calling them bitch or asshole, etc)
>The one who always plays snarky 'I'm just gonna abandon you if things go wrong' jackasses
>The one who tries to bring realism into fantasy games and flips out if you disagree with him about anything
>The one who flips out at anything even slightly powerful as a DM but does every exploit he can as a player

DM
>Rampant favoritism (I don't care that I was the one who was usually favorited, it was awful how insane it got when it came to how he treated the other PCs)

If it weren't for the fact that I hate learning the in's and out's of other groups I'd have tried to find another group to play with a long, long time ago.

File: cat1.gif (2MB, 500x329px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 500x329px

>funny joke is made
>other players have a hearty chuckle and move on
>That Guy beats it into the ground

>>53701500
Because you normally don't break into peoples houses and steal gold if you're lawful.

File: gamegrul.jpg (104KB, 780x651px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 780x651px

>>53696557
I'm with you. I almost booted a girl from my game because she refused to listen to anyone's advice, then tried to call me out on it. "You're only mad that I won't listen to your character creation advice!" I responded calmly "Yes, that is the nature of my grievance"

Girl "gamers", not even once.

>>53695780

> party literally cannot agree on anything ever

They're fantastic once they're on a task, but they can talk in circles for hours.

Not "this is annoying and feels like hours", real hours. The entire evening if allowed.

I've picked unaligned good for my next character, is this alright by you guys?

>>53701595
Unless you're a tax collector.

>>53701769
I'm not sure how you think tax collectors work, but it tends to not involve B&E.

Unless you're just meming about TAXES ARE THEFT in which case go get cucked by a band of thugs that realized the NAP stops mattering if you have more guns than the other guy.

File: tumblr_oqj76rUM0J1uemqfco1_1280.jpg (83KB, 480x933px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 480x933px

My players constantly trying to fuck over everyone, I have 1 actually cool player who seems to get tired of that shit.

It's mostly who says "I make a perception check on the body/room for loot" and then takes everything for himself.

What the fuck do I do?

>>53702163
Are you the GM, or a player?
Have you talked with them about it?
If you're a player, have you talked with the GM about it? What'd he say?

>>53698849
>inaction/neglect.
with >>53699149 here, the whole m-muh oppression rhetoric is bullshit

>>53698905
>Have them find Wanted posters for their characters in-game, describing their crimes and the effects it had. :D
I'd imagine they will not change their minds because of posters but that's a nice idea that I shall try, thanks!

File: ohgawd.jpg (248KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 1600x1200px

>>53695780
>You see an Army of Elite Goblins, over 100 strong outside of the building you are in, do you attack them, or remain hidden in the building?
>We attack them
>Get butthurt when they all die to a giant army

File: 1484428803107.jpg (84KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 960x720px

>>53702203
I'm the DM and no, I haven't talked to them.
I guess just the good ol talk will have to do.

I was thinking of a more in-game solution

>>53702508
Well yeah, first step is always to talk with them.
If they're a twat and you want to resolve it IC, give the other players plenty of perception and sense motive checks. Perception to see the guy looting, perception to see the guy's loot, perception to see he's suddenly carrying a larger load. Sense motive to tell he's acting funny when he rushes the corpses, sense motive to tell he's hiding something, sense motive to tell he's lying about the treasure the group found.
Unless sir jackass has absurd stealth and bluff checks, he'll get found out very quickly and you can leave it to IC justice from there.

>>53696974
I do this too. I'll call out "a timer has started," no indication of how long or what happens. Generally gets them to hustle, and they've actually told me how glad they are for it.

>>53698792
That's probably why the other anon said to put players in situations requiring their teamwork. Plus if they're all good, then they're less likely to back stab each other.

If they still do, stop pretending they're anything but murderhobo's and give them the murderiest murderhobo game to ever murderhobo.

>>53701215
Doesn't matter if it's only the death penalty. The basic question is "would a person who is 'good' punish everyone involved in that scenario".

>>53702340
>when players think they're invincible
I'm going to let your character die if you do something dumb without thinking after fair warning
>GMs that self-insert their retardedly OP GMPCs or former characters
It's annoying. I don't mind if someone from a previous campaign makes a short cameo for flavor (planehopping wizard etc) but don't just jerk yourself off man

>>53697944
>Just once I want to play something that isn't a martial class.
What's stopping you?

>>53698077
>>53697894
>>53696557
eh I play 3.5 Because I've played it for a LONG time so I know most of the shit like the back of my hand, and i own a metric fuckton of the books for it so there is also that.

>>53703412
Are you my DM?
Because if so, you might want to spend a bit more time studying the back of your hand before claiming much system mastery.

File: 1496087792797.jpg (489KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

489KB, 1280x720px

>>53697894
My group is still wowed by the shear bulk of content for Pathfinder while also acknowledging that 99.99% is garbage filler.

It drives me up the fucking walls.

>>53701185
>So by your own logic, you're full-caps EVIL since you're spending time posting on 4chan instead of doing charity work or joining the police?
Not that anon, but engaging in neutrality or evil does not necessarily override other good anon might be doing.
Theoretically.
The reality that all 4chan users are evil is pretty inevitable.

>>53701079
Still not that anon, but you're an idiot.

>Wrong.
It's actually right.

>Wrong.
That second bit is actually right.

>Wrong.
Okay, that one was wrong. Instead of "you're evil" it should have been "it's evil". Important difference.

>Wrong.
It's actually right.

>Unbelievable doublethink and also wrong.
"If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice."
It's actually right.

>If all this were to be true, then show me what exactly would make a character Neutral.
>Besides X and Y which totally work but I am discounting for no reason.
How about a guy that exposes and stops someone from beating his kids, accepts some evil without protesting, steals gold teeth from mass graves because, hey, free gold, would never allow torture or rape but sometimes could justify murder, and is sometimes silent in face of evil?

>>53695780
>Every quest hook is just "authority figure tells you to do a thing"

>>53703563
>Not that anon, but engaging in neutrality or evil does not necessarily override other good anon might be doing.
Well yes, but his logic is that if you don't do an act of good you could have done, you're EVIL. And he could be spending time doing acts of good instead of posting on 4chan. So he's EVIL by his logic.

>>53703563
>>Besides X and Y which totally work but I am discounting for no reason.
>How about a guy that exposes and stops someone from beating his kids, accepts some evil without protesting, steals gold teeth from mass graves because, hey, free gold, would never allow torture or rape but sometimes could justify murder, and is sometimes silent in face of evil?
So basically just an overall Good character. Okay.

Take your moralizing elsewhere. We're talking about games here and you are factually wrong.

>>53703681
>his logic is that if you don't take action to stop an act of evil, which would be an act of good, you are complicit in that specific evil, which in turn could mean you're EVIL.
FTFY

File: peace was previously an option.gif (962KB, 245x213px) Image search: [Google]

962KB, 245x213px

>>53695780
characters who do pic related

>>53703769
I guess it's balanced out by all the Good acts I'm complicit in by not acting to stop them, then?

>>53703688
>So basically just an overall Good character.
Wrong
The degrees of evils the graverobber finds acceptable are not specified.

>Take your moralizing elsewhere.
Wrong.
Understanding the difference between Good, Neutral, and Evil is not "moralizing"

>We're talking about games here and you are factually wrong.
Wrong

File: jim.jpg (54KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 900x900px

>>53703774
*pic and filename related

>>53703811
>>53703688
You're both shit at arguing your case, drop it for fucks sake. You're both faggots anyway

>>53703811
The definition of a Neutral alignment encompasses a huge area where on one end you have people who simply shy away from responsibility and on the other you have nutjobs who believe every Good act should be accompanied by an Evil one. Someone who ignores harm to others but commits none himself is well within the Neutral zone.

>>53703837
>reddit reaction image
You have to go back.

>>53703857
i havent been on reddit since 2009
i started coming here from 2007
i got a new laptop after having to move in 2015
all the images i have saved on my laptop are from here
fuck you i saved that image from here
fuck you

>>53696661
>Also, adding insane terrain limitations
like?

File: 1421986455199.png (67KB, 232x233px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 232x233px

>>53703913
http://archive.4plebs.org/tg/search/image/YmQd1X1a4cD-O4M6k1z2rw/

>>53703800
Kinda.

Good is like Cold.
Good can sometimes be defined by the absence of Evil.
Decreasing the presence of Evil, is Good.
Increasing the presence of Evil, is Evil.

You are not complicit in creating Cold by not acting to add heat.
You are complicit in creating Heat by not stopping someone from adding Heat.
For further lessons, ask Ben Parker.

But you could argue that not preventing Good is Good.
Sure.

But is it really good enough to balance what you do on 4chan?
Really?

File: 1453013219606.jpg (6KB, 200x146px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 200x146px

>>53703857
>reddit reaction image

Reddit has reaction images?

>>53703843
>You're both shit at arguing your case
Wrong

>drop it for fucks sake. You're both faggots anyway
True enough

>>53700554
>Han Solo
>good guy

haha!
no

han was a profiteering mercenary scumbag

>>53703974
Except that's not how it works at all in D&D. There are acts that are objectively and literally measurably Good, and acts that are objectively and literally measurably Evil. Most people are objectively and literally measurable as Neutral.

>what you do on 4chan
What; discuss traditional gaming and occasionally argue with retards and obvious transplants like you? Get the fuck over yourself and then lurk for 2 years before posting.

>>53697896
what if someone else from the group wants to roll for what his teammate failed?

>>53703846
>Someone who ignores harm to others but commits none himself may be well within the Neutral zone.
FTFY

It depends anon.
Ignoring one kid shoplifting? Maybe.
Looking the other way while you could stop genocide? Less likely to be neutral.
Letting a robber get away is not the same thing as killing your uncle, except when it is.

>>53704007
>was

And it's spelled "scoundrel"

>>53704031
>Except that's not how it works at all in D&D.
That... is completely correct.
Nevermind the Cold metaphor part of that post.

>Get the fuck over yourself and then lurk for 2 years before posting.
How many years will you have to lurk before you recognize running with a joke?
We used to do that back when we had fun here.

>>53704058
I'll need a damn good reason why they didn't decide to roll earlier, and why they're doing it now

>>53704058
The "one-time roll" thing usually implies a failure state. Like say you fail to pick the lock and trip a magical alarm, or something flits by at the edge of your field of vision but you don't happen to notice it. If it's just something you're pressed for time for but don't have forever to do then it could be reasonable for a teammate to go "here; let me give it a shot"; though it's doubtful why you'd want to instead of having your first choice of party member just try it again.

>>53704064
Not how it works. You are always within your rights to turn your head and say "it's not my problem".

>>53704140
Would a simple "hey you are taking too long let me try" {lockpicking} {moving the boulder} {investigating}

etc

>>53703774
Not sure what you mean. Do you mean when things could have been handled peacefully and discreetly but then someone decides they need to murder the king in front of his entire court (or equally retarded actions leading to unnecessary violence/complications)?

Because that is very fucking annoying. For example:
>playing 5e
>all rogue party
>need to rob shit off a riverboat casino
>I'm trying to oceans 11 this shit, other guy is planting a bomb and stealing shit, third guy is trying to break in to steal the goods
>after some gambling and social interaction with NPCs, I go to help the third guy
>he failed to pick a lock so I was going to give it a try
>I fail my roll and we get spotted
>Third guy immediately stabs the waitress who saw us
>I finish her off and barely manage to get the body hidden and the blood stain removed (arcane trickster) before people start coming up the stairs
>rather than let me bluff and lie (I built myself a very social rogue) Third guy throws caltrops down the stairwell to stop pursuit
>whole time Second guy is just filling his bag of holding with as much shiny stuff as possible
>Second guy even manages to get the documents we needed while everyone was paying attention to the fucking caltrops
Now we get to see what happened to Third guy because I got shoved onto a lifeboat with NPC's and the Second guy stole a lifeboat to gtfo.

Also learned that we need to be more clear during our planning process. I made several choices because I thought my character knew stuff but then it turned out that I did not. Which probably wouldn't have changed anything t b h.

>>53704157
>You are always within your rights to be Good, Evil, or Neutral
Agreed.
Not sure why you're stating it though.

>>53704181
No. They already finished the action needed to do their roll, so they can't be taking too long if they already finished. And again, why didn't you try the roll in the first place

>>53697896
>he doesn't know about taking 10
>>53696709

>>53704205
Well within your rights to do so and retain a Neutral alignment, moron, do I have to spell it all out for you?

>>53704157
This is why I tend to disallow rerolls. If the Rogue fails his lockpicking check, it's because the lock is too hard for him to pick, maybe even impossible to pick at all. Trying again does not change that.

>>53704206
>No. They already finished the action needed to do their roll,
But in >>53696656
>It's a struggle, it'll take you about an hour
Case, what is the party going to do for that whole hour if they can't kick him and try it themselves?

And a lock that doesn't get jammed, can be tried again by someone else in your case?

>>53699149
>to illustrate that not being Good doesn't instantly make you
It makes you a pussy.

If you see Evil and don't care, you are Evil.
If you see Evil but don't act even if you care, you are a pussy.

There is no gray in the war of Light and Darkness.

>>53704268
That's up to how you frame the roll, I guess. You've got a sort of quantum lock going on where the roll decides the state of it; if the Rogue rolls high then it's a discount lock and if he rolls low then it's got ten security tumblers and an anti-tamper device. I prefer to make it so that the lock is such-and-such level of difficulty, and every attempt takes so long; the players then decide whether it's worth it to watch the Rogue fumble his fingers that third or fourth time while their intel spoils away and the enemies reposition themselves.

>>53704379
Nice roleplaying but as long as you understand that's factually wrong then we're all good.

File: 12 - Angel.png (838KB, 1000x563px) Image search: [Google]

838KB, 1000x563px

>>53704157
>>53704243
>Well within your rights to do so and retain a Neutral alignment, moron, do I have to spell it all out for you?
Well, I've not heard anyone refer to it as "having a right to act (and retain a Neutral alignment)" before.

But anyway, you're wrong.
That is how it works.
Sometimes.

Sometimes evil is passive and effortless.
It depends.

Hell, sometimes the most evil thing a character has done, or could do in a situation, is turning away and saying "it's not my problem".

>>53704379
Cameras confirmed for Evil!

>>53698956
Punish low rolls on useless checks with fake traps raward their characters paranoia with bogging down time and give them more pressing time limits

>>53704314
You can help the other person by doing a team check, but kicking them off and negating their roll is not happening.

You still haven't answered my question of why you didn't want to roll in the first place, and only change your mind when it's not a high roll. If you can pick locks, why did you let the other guy do it and why didn't you assist them in the first place. If no one else can pick locks, and the one that can failed, then the lock is beyond them at their current level of skill.

If you're in a position to assist, but choose not to, then you suck it up and keep the failed result. If you're not in a position to assist, either because you can't or aren't there, then you still suck it up and keep the failed result.

There is no point in having skill checks if you're going to just keep rolling until you succeed anyway.

>>53704414
heh
Clever.
Well, they do steal souls.

But if you can't perceive Evil, you're not ignoring it, so anon's point is solid, loophole or not.

>>53704402
>sometimes the most evil thing a character has done, or could do in a situation, is turning away and saying "it's not my problem"
Usually it's because the character is shirking a responsibility which they have actively taken upon themselves, or they're hiding their actual collusion and contribution toward the situation. If it truthfully wasn't their problem then they committed no Evil.

we're all really good friends, so we've got MAYBE two hours before things completely break down and we just start goofing around with each other. we're switching to every other week now because of that.

>>53703964
I'm fairly sure you have the capacity to look to the top and/or bottom of the page and see that there are more boards than /tg/

>>53698956
I am merely explaining the player's perspective, as they naturally always desire the best possible outcome. If you present choices as, "You can have your cake, or you can eat it," your players will instead choose to reject that, and search for some way to have their cake and eat it too. I'm not saying that they're right, but that is the mindset you are working with. If you don't want to understand that, then fine, but your game won't improve.

>>53704484
The only other result if you check all boards is a bong on /pol/, which is majority r/The_Donald transplants, and there are no results on Desu.

>>53704140
Say
>rogue rolls a 2, lockpick shatters.
>bard wants to try, since the rogue clearly fucked up.

Would that work

>>53704525
>If you're in a position to assist, but choose not to, then you suck it up and keep the failed result.

>>53704572
How the fuck do you help with lockpicking aside from "OK I'll do it"?

>>53704464
>If it truthfully wasn't their problem then they committed no Evil.
This the opinion you have not proven to be the case.

I can shoot a hole in it by pointing out that how "truthfully not their problem" it is can not be known with certainty, so acting as if they can assume it not their problem is presumptuous and capricious, which when dealing with matters of Evil, is far from Good and perhaps Evil itself.
No person "knows" something is not their problem, they merely gauge and presume.
Acting to ignore evil being done to others based on valuing your presumptions more than the actual real fate of others, is a bit evil.

>>53704588
In your example, the bard could do any of the bardic things that help people with skills in general, and he can also give advice as represented by the teamwork roll you chose not to do

>>53704414
They are though, cameras are oppresive

>>53704610
OK, so your system has a generic "help that guy with literally anything" mechanic? Yeah, that'll take the excuse away.

>>53704636
I've yet to see or hear of a system that doesn't have a teamwork system in it, so yeah, it kinda does

>>53704392
I understand your method, but I prefer a quantum lock to multiple rerolls any day. At the very least it avoids the issue of the master rogue flubbing a basic lock. Then again I also run a heavily improvisational style so I'm very used to letting the dice do the storytelling for me.

>>53704670
Far, far too many forget to have one for non-combat tasks.

>>53704594
Fucking hell you keep getting hung up on word choice. "Knows to the best of their knowledge or beyond a reasonable doubt that they carry no culpability for the problem arisen, including recklessness or negligence, where if negligence the negligence be a root cause rather than refusal to ameliorate". Zero points for "what if you stepped on a butterfly" replies.

>>53704698
That's fair. As long as it works for the players and the game.

>>53704698
>quantum lock
?

>>53704459
Have you never watched someone attempt to do something, see they were having some difficulty, and then choose to intervene, either by assisting them or taking over the task yourself?

This doesn't negate the previous failed roll; that character did fail to perform whatever task they were attempting, but it mostly depends on what the consequences for failure are. If the consequence for failure changes the circumstances of the skill check (like jamming a lock when attempting to pick it), then that's clearly different than if there aren't really any consequences, other than perhaps some time wasted. In the case of the latter, you as the DM, the adjudicator of time, have it in your power to say, "Hey, if this character is going to take a while, of course your character can see this, and try and help get this done faster."

>what would the BBEG do in my place
>would he ignore the issue or help the bystander?
Easy to solve if something is evil or not by that. Just picture the stereotypical villain, like Sauron. If you would behave like Sauron then you are evil and a paladin should smite you.

>>53704755
If you're taking over, say on the example of picking a lock where only one person can try at a time, then that usually means you're better at it or you've noticed a mistake the other person hasn't, which then leads to the question of why you weren't the first one up for the task. If you're roleplaying a character who's arrogant or just a bit pushy like that then that's fine, but if you do it too often then it might get annoying. And, again, we've already mentioned that if there aren't any consequences for failing to pick the lock then you might as well just skip the roll and say they popped it.

>>53704780
But what if the Paladin is also behaving like Sauron? Should I grab his arm, slam his sword into his helm, and tell him to start smiting himself?

File: alexander-fedosov-nemesis.jpg (450KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

450KB, 1200x1200px

>>53695780
>players
>make characters who can only fight
>durrhurr fucking spotlight hog

>GM
>overpowered NPCs

>>53704712
>"Knows to the best of their knowledge or beyond a reasonable doubt that they carry no culpability for the problem arisen, including recklessness or negligence, where if negligence the negligence be a root cause rather than refusal to ameliorate".
How often is the above the case when a person does not act to stop evil?
How often does someone saying, "It's not my problem." mean they truly "carry no culpability for the problem arisen, including recklessness or negligence"?
Is it really so often that you feel unshakably confident that 'You are always within your rights to turn your head and say "it's not my problem". (and retain your neutrality)'?

Yeah, funny thing about internet posts is that word choice matters.

>>53704900
>How often is the above the case when a person does not act to stop evil?
Overwhelmingly most of the damn time. Again, zero points for stepping on butterflies and zero points for sins of the father.

File: 1244744001299.png (34KB, 690x656px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 690x656px

>>53695780
I'm tired of my players not fucking showing up to my sessions.

>>53704808
>>53704755
And I'll append to this, where this obviously gets into inappropriate metagaming territory is when someone attempts to actually negate a failed check with their own skill check. The rogue jams the lock, and the bard player says, "No, I would've helped them with that check," even though they are reacting to the rogue's skill check failure. The lock's already jammed, if they want to do something now, it's under these new circumstances.

This also is clearly inappropriate in the case of mental skill checks. If the rogue player reacts to the bard failing their check to call an NPC's bluff, that's just metagaming.

But, say, attempting to throw a grappling hook into a secure anchor point? This is something that can probably be attempted multiple times by multiple people until the rope pulls taut. But like you said, that just begs the question why prompt skill checks at all at that point. And the only answers I can think of are that rolling dice are fun, and there might be some indirect consequences, based on how long the task took to complete, and how many failures there were before the needed success.

>>53704945
>Overwhelmingly most of the damn time when someone says "It's not my problem" it is 100% actually not their problem and in no way self deception or any other form of untruth.
Agree to disagree.

File: 38fm8Ht.gif (22KB, 500x300px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 500x300px

>>53695780
>players
Not reading the setting documents. I don't expect players to read the big-ass text of stuff that's only of interest to me, but when nobody knows any of the gods of the world, or even the names of the country they are currently in after being told five times over the course of two months, I'm mad. This goes double if you're trying to argue with me about shit you clearly didn't read anything on

>>53705145
I've got the opposite issue. I've been badgering my GM for a setting doc for months now, and I don't even know the name of the damn country we're in.

>>53697835
I think the point in the old school games was to have indifference about your characters. Like, from the few anecdotes I've heard, character's died and were promptly replaced by very similar characters with no real narrative tie in. Essentially it was a long-form combat game with a story plastered over the top of it. Not a bad thing, obviously not what most people want these days.

>>53706504
The really old dungeon crawls were effectively small-scale wargames that had persistent characters and rules for non-combat situations. Then they started to develop towards more universal systems, and from there bloomed into a giant spread that now ranges from combat-only to utter non-combat.
Back in the day, character death was expected and common. Hell, people frequently didn't even name a fighter until they got past 1st level.

File: 1490048664148.png (1MB, 1020x822px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1020x822px

>>53703993
Reddit is basically just 4chan with usernames and the ability to make your own boards.

The only reason people get up in arms over them is MUH INTERNET TRIBALISM

>>53698908
>rogue betrays party
>gets called out for his shit
>leaves
Good end. Would have been better if you told him straight up "you're a cunt"

>>53696053
This so fucking much. I've never even had an NPC betray them.

>NPCs try to be nice, and treat them well
Instant suspicion

>Make them work for a greasy, fat, bearded dude who literally smells like a corpse and who is secretly a member of a necromancer secret society . They are escorting his wagon (they think he's a merchant).
>Along the way a few friendly goblins want to trade with them, one of those digs around the merchandise and finds a shiny magic helmet which was the helmet of a demonic witch king of a previous campaign.
>The dude doesn't want to tell them about it or how he got it.
Total and complete trust.

It's become rather hilarious recently. I've started running Murder In Baldur's Gate (by the way, it's a pretty cool urban adventure, I'd recommend it) and this happened:

>Loved hero and one of the four Dukes of the city gets murdered in the middle of a festival by some kind of crazed cultist who turns into a monster afterwards
>Another Duke tries to hire them to uproot the mafia which he thinks is responsible for the murder
>"Eh.... we'll think about it"
>The marshall of the city's army/part of their guard tries to hire them for the same thing
>"Eh... we'll think about it"
>A shifty bearded guy, who is actually a woman in disguise leads them to a shady arabic neighbourhood, into their pawnshop, and reveals she's part of this mafia.
>She tells them about how this mafia is actually helping the people and basically bullshits them
>'So, this toll collector dude is actually robbing people' (he kind of was) 'SOMEONE should do something about him'
>"Okay how can we rob him"

My players are fucking idiots.

>>53698849
>If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality."

The mouse can't do anything for me, so...

>>53700659
I heard this a few months ago for the first time.
Our Rogue/Sorcessor/Whore had been stealing 25 percent worth of items and reward money for herself without us knowing. In fairness she picked the character drawback Greed.
But when she died (refused a ressurection spell because she wanted to play some warforged arcanist) we found all the loot and we all heard her over the discord coms.
"Its what my character would do" you could literlaly hear the shit eating grin.

If that is the standard for evil then most people are evil. Sure, most people would stop their family or friends from being tortured or murdered, but most people don't give two shits if it's someone outside their arbitrary circle.

>>53705016
preach it

File: 1424123567766.jpg (140KB, 705x741px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 705x741px

>>53700971
>quotes a minister and a priest
>frames it in terms of religious sins
>implies Hitler was evil

>>53701030
>can't remember any names, even if they're common, modern day, and monosyllabic

Literally me
What are you gonna do about it?

File: 1492881135979.jpg (9KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 400x300px

>sit down for session
>player doesn't show up
>DM just postpones
>sit down for next session
>player doesn't show up again
>DM postpones again
>rinse and repeat for months

I KNOW WE HAVE A SMALL PLAY GROUP, BUT FUCK YOU, I WANNA PLAY D&D.

>>53707245
Also it's filled to the brim with cancer and normies.

>DM
Coming completely unprepared all the time, sometimes cancels our weekly sessions because he didn't think of anything. Doesn't even have a map of anything and names races and people on the spot.

>Players
Minmaxing douces and people that come high to the session.

File: 1496348277349.jpg (10KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 200x200px

>>53711858
>filled to the brim with cancer and normies
>implying 4chan isn't also that

>tried DMing for my friend a total of one time
>realize the rest of my party literally don't even know what half the things on their character sheets mean
>much less have they read any parts of the player handbook in favor of online character sheet makers
>every single round in combat takes like 30 minutes for just 3-4 characters and like 3 enemies
>the DM playing just wanted to powergame murderhobo from level 1 planning to build Warlock 3 Sorc 17
>we never even made it to floor three of a four-floor cave which was the first place in the campaign they started in

File: shodan_hats_you.png (21KB, 298x202px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 298x202px

>>53711593
>sit down for session
>only me and the GM show up
>he runs the game anyway
>he doesn't change the encounters at all
>the whole game is me running to a safe place

>>53711858
Like he said, basically just 4chan with usernames and the ability to make your own boards.

>>53701178
But it doesn't take a full lifetime for a corpse to rot. Did you mean skeletons instead of corpses?

>>53701178
But he is right...

>>53713201
Yeah, including skeletons. Absolutely no remains

File: 1467125433320.png (70KB, 292x227px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 292x227px

>>53695989
>"we're not going to go balls to the walls in either direction like normal people tend to usually do"
>WOW FUCK YOU PUSSY

File: 1449291331717.png (25KB, 228x239px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 228x239px

>>53716020
>trying to defuse a bomb versus running away is "going balls to the wall"
The DM wouldn't frame it as dichotomous if there were a golden mean you could achieve.

>>53716078
What about running away WITH the bomb while defusing it

>>53716106
The whole point of running away is so that you aren't in the bomb's kill radius.

>>53716078
None of those examples were anything like bomb defusal.

>>53716178
One was literally about bomb defusal.

>>53716192
I guess one out of three is good enough.

>>53695780

>To my DM
Jesus christ, dude, not EVERY NPC has to be a hostile buttcrack who gets all snippy with the party over minor things. It wouldn't kill you to have the occasional helpful or friendly person show up in our adventures instead of 50 shades of dismissive bumblefuck who usually won't improve his attitude when we save his life or accomplish his quest with flying colors.

Also, you can't do a cockney accent nearly as well as you think you do and it's really not appropriate to the setting. Stop using it.

>To my players
For god's sake, you guys keep pushing for something more challenging and intentionally do not pack a lot of healing. I'd appreciate it if when I DO throw something unexpectedly scary your way you fall back and make a plan rather than bailing on the mission/dungeon entirely and expecting me to have another right then and there. You give up way too easily when it's time to play hardball.

>>53716237
>not EVERY NPC has to be a hostile buttcrack who gets all snippy with the party over minor things.
If he is role playing medieval times realistic then yes every NPC should fear for their lifes when meeting strangers.

>>53716316

More of a renaissance era setting, for one, and for two it's a setting where adventurers are a commonplace and well-established part of the setting. We have a guild and badges and everything, but even the fucking HIRELINGS want to cop a 'tude with THEIR FUCKING EMPLOYERS when this guy runs. It drives me crazy.

File: 1XODFVb.png (37KB, 295x289px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 295x289px

>>53716316
Commoners didn't fear for their lives the moment a new face showed up you faggot

>>53716316
I think I found the GM.

>>53716350
Commoners did fear for their lives when unknown armed men show up at their doorstep.

You weren't there, stop pretending you know what commoners fear. They feared a shitload of things, including the taxman that could rape your daughter.

>>53716339
Then I agree your DM is autistic. Tell him straight to his face.

>>53716404

On the other hand, the guy's complaint didn't appear to be that the NPCs were afraid of the party so much as they were assholes to the party for no reason.

If you are afraid of a heavily armed stranger showing up looking to do some jobs in your area, I don't think you would "get snippy" with said person because you would be afraid of getting your head cut off.

>>53716435
Yeah the original anon is right, the DM is dumb and retarded. I just told him to give it to him straight, maybe he can change if the anon asks the DM why exactly are they behaving like that.

>Alright, your party rides into town as the sun sets on the horizon. The wind blows a chill, signalling the coming of autumn nights. Folks seem to keep the roads sparse, but it seems as though there's something akin to a stage being built at the plaza in the center of town.
>>Where's the nearest tavern?
>Next to the stables near where you rode in on, you see a large building filled with light smoke and cheery laughter. A sign dangles out front: The Honeyed Rose.
>>We stable our horses and get a room. How much?
Cue me fruitlessly trying to get them to talk to the innkeep like he's a person.
>>Cool, we spend five silver per person and go to bed.
And now cue them looking at me like dumb assholes until I tell them that the next day arrives, then proceed to do and say nothing until they get on their horses, and then do and say nothing until the next town comes up. Wash rinse repeat.

Surely there's a group out there that actually enjoys roleplaying the journey instead of wanting to fast travel straight to the next quest marker.

>>53716556
I do that, but because I hate my GM, everything is so railroading and the story is shit. So I want to be done with the game as soon as possible. Its been so long after I actually tried to play the game that I don't even know what to do in your situation.

What do you want your players to do upon entering a new town?

>>53716556
If they don't care, they don't care, and it's on you.

I once was DMing a D&D game and the players wanted to change the rules mid combat to favor them. Ex: attacking from "behind" to give the rogue sneak attack

>>53716556
Why should I care about some bumblefuck inkeep?

Give me a reason to do anything but paying him, dipshit

>>53716726
>everything is so railroading and the story is shit.
How ironic, I feel like I'm railroading when they don't explore the place. I'm trying to be more sandbox, but I can't tailor the game to their wants if all they want is "Whatever man, I'm fine with anything."

>What do you want your players to do upon entering a new town?
If it's at night I understand going to the inn, but I feel like they should be more open to asking around to see what's in town that might interest them. For example, I feel like the alchemist should ask about apothecaries, the wizard might be interested in a library, the fighter might just try to start an arm-wrestling competition at the bar. I just want them to interact with the world around them instead of just doing the baseline things like sleep and eat until the next questgiver shakes them down. I feel like an adventuring party should make use of their downtime by either doing things to resupply or just doing things relevant to their hobbies. At the very least I want them to walk around town and see if there's anything that might interest them.

>>53716556

I understand the sentiment.

Don't we all pretty much do this with clerks, waitstaff, etc? I mean, sometimes we engage, but definitely not always.

>>53716897
Sure, you might not care about him, and maybe your character doesn't either. But if you were playing the social butterfly character, why would you just willfully ignore all human contact for days on end?

>>53716556
I feel you. I get the same shit from my players, except half make assive aggressive comments about me making them, well, interact with the world, and the other half just tell me outright to skip to the next story bit.

Like, seriously guys, fuck you. Interact with stuff

>>53717030
How is that an argument?

>>53704137
Not that guy but t was a shitty metaphor. When you need 7 or 8 sentences to explain a metaphor then that's a good indicator that it's a shitty metaphor.

This entire argument is just degrees of how much more you could be doing that you aren't, and how evil it does or doesn't make you based on magic opinion-facts of different people on a Bangladeshi rice-counting forum.

>>53698908

That says a lot about CN player's true personality more than anything else. Good riddance. People like that always skezzed me out.

>>53716911
It's not like that, I always start doing shit but the answer is always "there is nothing like that", "you don't find anything" "No there is no one like that in the city" (this one was me trying to find 'poor' or homeless people so I can aid them with stuff we got from thieves, my character likes to help people in need)

Like once I paid the barkeeper for some rumours and I got no information about the town or what is going on nearby, no ploothooks or anything so whatever. After a while I just got bored and decided to go to the next point as soon as possible to be done with this shit game and shit setting.

I hate my group

>>53717447
>When you need 7 or 8 sentences to explain a metaphor then that's a good indicator that you're explaining a concept as simple as "quietly sipping your tea while several feet away someone burns a child to death, hearing it screaming in agony as you ignore what is 'legitimately not your problem' is somewhat Evil" to ignorant strangers on a Bangladeshi rice-counting forum.
The metaphor was simple.
Enticing the horse to drink was not.

>>53717957
>"quietly sipping your tea while several feet away someone burns a child to death, hearing it screaming in agony as you ignore what is 'legitimately not your problem' is somewhat Evil

Strawman out the ass here. Most Neutral actions would be watching in horror hoping someone else will help, not sitting there sipping your tea. You twat

>>53695780
>Every single big enemy "teleports away"
One time we even had an antimagic field up and the dude still had the balls to say the boss we had been fucking up for the past 3 hours bullshitted his way to the other side of the material plane.

>wants to do something with every fucking second of downtime
your character has a fucking week of blacksmithing experience, no you can't craft a magical weapon with two rocks and a pile of dragon shit.

It wouldn't be so bad if they picked a single profession, like alchemy, so i could just give them a standard system to use and have that be that. They have to make special items and modifications to EVERYTHING, which I get 5 seconds to come up with when I try to give them an uneventful travel or rest period.

>>53718415
I roll to craft it anyway

>>53697894
I tried going from 3.PF to 5e, but all every single 5e group I joined turned out to be shit. Either full of that guys, or an awful gm. Eventually went back to 3.PF and got a quality group. I'd say it's the system's fault for attracting bottom of the barrel idiots, but those people can be found everywhere. I think I just got unlucky.

>>53718415
Why can't people just talk to each other in character during downtime. Why must every waking second be about murderhoboing?

Guys, what is passive perception? How does it work?

>>53718589
Passive Perception is something in 5e that can supplant your Perception roll. If you roll lower than your passive, then your passive takes over that roll's result. I can't speak to other systems.

>>53718689
Thanks, yeah I was referring to 5e.

>>53718689
I remember it being in 3.5 as 10+Your bonuses.

>>53718785
3.5 didn't have passive perception as a default rule. 4e did though.

>>53718785
Yeah, 3.5 and 3.pf have things called "Taking 10" and "Taking 20." I assume you could Take 10 on a quick ability check, and Take 20 on something that's a long time.

>>53718822
>>53718825
Actually, it was not take 10 and I mixed up skills.

Listen is what allows you to basically take 10 at all times unless your took a second to try and detect something.

Spot is rolled any time something tries to sneak past you or moves into an appropriate range band as a free action. So, 3.5 has passive perception but it is still subject to the ridiculous clusterfuck that is 3.5 skills.

>>53718469
I know you're making a joke, but that's a little pet peeve of mine; players who, after being told no by the GM, go "I do it anyway"

You were just told, for whatever reason, that you can't do something by the guy who controls the universe. Saying you do it anyway is childish

>>53719016
Natural 20! What now, GM?

>>53719078
You fail and have wasted everyone's time

>>53719078
>people who think nat 20s mean anything outside of combat
Maximum over-rustle.

>>53718689
That's not how it works in 5e. Passive Perception is what's taken to be your default roll when you're doing a task repeatedly (like keeping an eye out when on watch for the night) or when the DM wants to make a check in secret. If you use an action to try to find something with Perception and roll a 2, you don't get to supplant it with your Passive score.

>>53719118
>>53719130
>how to make an enemy out of your party.jpg
Shit DM or good DM? That is the question.

>>53719078
your character has a fucking week of blacksmithing experience, no you can't craft a magical weapon with two rocks and a pile of dragon shit

> I roll to craft it anyway. Natural 20! What now, GM?

Your rocks sit in the pile of shit in a perfect diorama display of the famous 'whickered rocks' from your hometown. You even sculpted the shit a little to imitate the appearance of the burial mound entrance. Tired after what turned out to be an 8-hour labour and smelling of shit so hard you'll get a -2 circumstantial Cha penalty until you take a hot bath you note with a hint of sadness that neither rocks nor dragon shit are any closer to being a magical weapon than before you started. But surely what matters is that they are magical to your heart.

>>53719661
>But surely what matters is that they are magical to your heart.
10/10

>>53698849
>"If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality."
This isn't true. Go away tumblr.

>>53701161
So you gave shit you can live without, or helped people that you rely on, and think that makes you a paragon of virtue? Sounds like you're protecting your own interests, you narcissistic altruist.

Why don't you spend 10-20 hours a week (BARELY a part time job!) assisting the misfortunate? Do you donate to charity regularly? There are literally starving people near you and you're not doing a thing! Pretty evil, desu.

>>53701189


>All that it takes for evil to triumph is for 'good' men to do nothing.
Hes not talking about good men, hes talking about neutral men, so the quote is entirely relevant. You don't really understand the distinction, do you?

>>53720679
There is no distinction, that's everyone's point, dude. Neutral is the devil's pawn, therefore evil.

>>53720728
Technically, to be a pawn of the devil, you'd need to actively serve his interests, not remain inactive when observing them.

Also, you and 2-3 other people don't count as everyone.

>>53695780
>GM is absolutely fantastic and great guy
>Has got some notable self-esteem issues
It's not annoying, it's just you wish they'll finally listen when you tell them they ain't bad/done something bad, y'know?
It's tiring, constantly trying and failing to get 'em out of that mindset, especially when you've been in such a mindset before.

>>53720789
>Technically, to be a pawn of the devil, you'd need to actively serve his interests
No, read the thread, someone literally quoted the bible. The devil wants you to do nothing.

We do count as everyone, it is you and you alone who doesn't count.

>>53720989
>>Technically, to be a pawn of the devil, you'd need to actively serve his interests
>No, read the thread, someone literally quoted the bible. The devil wants you to do nothing.
a) Are you really using the bible as a source of moral authority? Hey, whats your opinion on executing gays?
b) Got a specific verse number?
>We do count as everyone, it is you and you alone who doesn't count.
So you're saying no one else believes moral neutrality exists? What about the people who invented the category?

>>53718345
>Most Neutral actions would be watching in horror hoping someone else will help, not sitting there sipping your tea
Effectively the same level of action as far as the burning child is concerned.
The anon being explained to earlier was intentionally ignoring such things, so the metaphor was explained more than strictly necessary..
Which is what we were talking about, remember?

Ignoring evil is ignoring evil.
The character sipping tea is at least honest and not hypocritical about it.

>>53696752
>Why do people show up without characters ready?
It's always either they're too flighty/preoccupied to actually be involved in a game or because they don't actually want to play the game. Either way, they shouldn't be at the table.

>>53721070
>burning a child is inherently evil
Maybe the child deserved to be burned? If you don't have that information, doesn't it make sense not to get involved?

>>53721022
>Hey, whats your opinion on executing gays?
I love it?

Why would that have anything to do with morality? Fuck those unnatural bitches.


>What about the people who invented the category?
Probably dead of old age already.

I am the anon arguing that remaining neutral while ignoring, and therefore allowing, Evil, is an evil act.

>>53701189
>Nothing, it's a stupid alignment which is the entire point
You're an idiot.
You're simplifying miserable piles of good and evil acts into one singular alignment.
Neutral people are neutral but can ignore some evils and act to stop others.
They do not necessarily "end up silently complicit with whoever has the most power."
Perhaps they actively fight against Evil Oppression because it's Evil, but also kill whenever they can because they like murdering.Or whatever.

File: 1465494823301.jpg (19KB, 326x309px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 326x309px

Being a bad GM.
I've only been doing it for a short period of time, and I know that you can't just pick anything up and be an expert, but it's tough. It really is.

>>53721114
>Maybe the child deserved to be burned?
Fine.
Replace "burning a child" with "not using a coaster" or whatever chafes your jimmies as Inherently Evil.
The example doesn't matter.

As I pointed out earlier, even if the neutral person's presumption that it is "legitimately not their problem" is actually correct, they have no way of knowing that is true.
They are valuing the worth of their presumption over the worth of stopping the Evil act.
They're willing to risk doing evil through inaction rather risk erring on the side of good.
That vain arrogance is a little evil, even if they were ultimately right.

>>53716316
>>53716350
If you fear for your life, isn't that more of a reason to NOT be an asshole to someone?

>>53700971
Dude, you're bringing in modern morals to a fantasy setting. While I agree with what you're saying in real life, that's just not how the fucking game works.

Stop moralfagging and understand that neutral alignment exists for character storytelling and narrative purposes. Neutral characters would probably go to Hell, yeah, but it doesn't mean they're evil for the game's purposes.

Think of it like the Fate games, where evil actions turn you demonic and good actions turn you angelic. Neutrality would just leave you normal.

>>53721345
Depends on the local laws, maybe the Count told them to behave like that.

>>53721070
m8 what was being talked about originally was neutral players being greedy cunts repeatedly until it grows tiresome, then armchair philosophers started sperging out about how if you don't do enough to stop evil it makes you evil.

So watching a child being burned is evil if you have the power to stop it, you are saying?
Ignoring evil is evil, yea?

How much have you been ignoring the amount of rapes that occur in africa, when you could be donating your spare money to causes to stop that, effectively using your power to help stop it? Hell, you can find plenty of videos online of young men being burned alive tied to tires in Africa, which is quite close to the child burning meme.

Are we all evil for doing nothing to stop that when we could be collectively pooling our efforts to stop it in some way? Or is your worldview retarded when logically applied to inconvenient subjects?

>>53695780
>Make peaceful faction in space
>engineer starts to panic
>"GUYS THEIR GOING TO KILL US! WE NEED TO BLOW UP THEIR SHIP, AND KILL ALL OF THEM!

>>53721640
Hold onto your tits for this:

>Ignoring evil is evil, yea?
Yeah.

>How much have you been ignoring the amount of rapes that occur in africa, when you could be donating your spare money to causes to stop that, effectively using your power to help stop it?
A significant amount.
There is a large amount that I could be doing to help those people, or others, that I am not doing for basically selfish reasons.

>Are we all evil for doing nothing to stop that when we could be collectively pooling our efforts to stop it in some way?
Not necessarily.
We all are not necessarily evil for that.
However, (and here's where you need to hold onto your tits) ignoring those evils when we can do something about it is still an evil act.
A little one, but there it is.
Ignoring evil and allowing evil IS an evil act.
But committing an evil act is not the same thing as being an evil person.
You don't switch alignments anytime you take an action that might be outside them.
Everyone knows that.

>Or is your worldview retarded when logically applied to inconvenient subjects?
No, it holds up quite nicely, thank you.
It helps to not be a total fucking idiot or by reading the god damn thread:
>>53703563
>Instead of "you're evil" it should have been "it's evil". Important difference.

>>53703811
>Ireland & Switzerland were evil for not fighting the Nazis
>a nation that acts according to its interests & otherwise pursues a policy of non-intervention is evil

lol ok, have fun liberating Syria, Iran, & Saudi Arabia

>>53721942
1. Applying alignments to nations and their actions gets muddy pretty quickly.

2. Let's see:
>not fighting the Nazis is evil
>a policy of non-intervention against evil is evil
Kinda, yeah. Sorry.

Also, stealing a loaf of bread to feed your starving family is also evil, but probably not as evil as letting your family starve to death because you were unwilling to commit an evil act.
Turns out life is messy and unfair and you're probably gonna get a little evil on you.

>>53722005
Hey fuck off buddy, your definition of evil is wrong. Your evil is the real world's normal. Your lifestyle is wrong and so are you. And you will never be able to make other people change their beliefs because the one thing that instantly turns people away is being condemned for being their version of normal.

>>53704780
This is ridiculous. If you witness an armed robbery, then Sauron would probably consider it beneath his notice. An orc might kill all those involved & take for himself. A random peasant (i.e. Most people) would likely do nothing, except perhaps alerting the town guard after the fact because they don't wish to be robbed themselves.

>>53710157
Exactly right. Humans are tribal and would primarily fall into the lawful neutral camp.

The only way a deliberate inaction can shift your alignment towards Evil is if you had a duty to intervene and chose to ignore it or execute it in such a way that your intervention was ineffective.
I'm so happy I'm not playing DnD with moralizing faggots who want to paint everyone EEEEEEVIL for not upholding their 20th century 'universal human' values in my fantasy Australia.

>>53722049
>A random peasant (i.e. Most people) would likely do nothing
>then Sauron would probably consider it beneath his notice.
Are you claiming you would do the same as Sauron? If anything that just proves his point. The orc being eviler than both doesn't change the subject.

>>53701077
Nigga, if everyone played an Inquisitor or overzealous Paladin, the game would be boring af.

3/10, you got me to respond.

>>53722041
>Hey fuck off buddy, your definition of evil is wrong.
Nope.
Normalizing evil doesn't make it less evil, sorry.

>Your evil is the real world's normal.
Kinda have to agree with that.
There is a lot of evil out there.
There is also a lot of good, wonder, and beauty.

>Your lifestyle is wrong and so are you.
I'm not wrong and you know nothing about my lifestyle, so I'm thinking you're making some wild assumptions over there anon.

>And you will never be able to make other people change their beliefs because the one thing that instantly turns people away is being condemned for being their version of normal.
I wasn't really trying to change beliefs.
I was just stating facts because someone was wrong on the internet.
I am not condemning anyone.
I am specifically saying they are NOT necessarily evil for doing an evil thing.
Condemning would be the whole "One drop of black paint turns a can of white paint grey" philosophy, which is directly opposed to what I'm saying.
My point, which you seem to be missing, is this: OPEN YOUR EYES.
Yes, ignoring evil is evil.
Yes, most all of us do it to some degree.
Yes, most all of us commit evil acts, that's called "being a sinner" or "being human".
The idea is to sin less, commit less evil, ignore less evil.

WHICH YOU WON"T DO IF YOU REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU'RE DOING IT.

Ignoring the evil acts of others is your tiny evil act.
Ignoring your own evil act compounds the evil.
Own it. And try to do better.

Pretending that everything is fine and that ignoring the evil of others is fine is a bad habit.
Perhaps an evil one.

>>53722236
You are wrong. Absolute morality is not real, and your 'evil' doesn't map to any RPG definition of the concept.

>hur dur, black and white morality, Durrr

What if you let the nazis kill Jew because talking against it would get your family killed? What about that one grand parent who's a saint to you and your family donates and is a racist, what about the corrupt cop who's taking money to ignore the towns mob because he needs money for his kid's medicine?

Morality is an odd thing. Sometimes our laws and morals and desires intersect in ways that don't always work out. Not everyone is either a godly kind fighter for justice or a baby raping killer. Sadly, in real life people have flaws and may not be convicted enough to be harmed for something, or are victims of circumstance.

>>53722143
>The only way a deliberate inaction can shift your alignment towards Evil is if you had a duty to intervene and chose to ignore it or execute it in such a way that your intervention was ineffective.
This guy gets it.

The peasant in the field keeping their head down isn't really getting shifted toward evil for tiny little inaction that allow evil to pervade the land.

>>53721295
The idea that there is more potential vain arrogance in not wishing to interfere in a situation, than in blindly deciding to do what one perceives as the correct course of action, is sheer idiocy.

>>53701280
That would seriously piss me off.

My players overreact to what I say. If I had told them that the enemy didn't bleed after he was shot, they'd probably instantly assume demilich with glamour magic, even though I consistently stat things to be fair and wouldn't throw a goddamn demilich at a party of level fives unless they literally asked for it.

>Shit you're tired of

Lesbians. Just fucking lesbians.

>>53722248
>Absolute morality is not real
When was it disproved again?
I am curious as to how.

>and your 'evil' doesn't map to any RPG definition of the concept.
It maps to all of them that I've seen, it's just not relevant to them.
>Is ignoring evil an evil act?
>Technically, but not mechanically significant.
>Okay

Feel free to rage against me, but your denial doesn't make me wrong.

>>53722320
>When was it disproved again?
When every major nation has had different morals, and none of them are any more right than any if the others.

>>53722320
>It maps to all of them that I've seen
Wrong.

>>53722283
The idea that you think that choosing not to act is not also blindly deciding to do what one perceives as the correct course of action, is sheer idiocy.

>>53722335
>none of them are any more right than any if the others.
When was this proved again?
I am curious as to how.

>>It maps to all of them that I've seen
>Wrong.
There you go again with your angry assumptions.

>>53722005
A nation is merely a group of people. Ok, enjoy telling the people of Ireland that they should feel just as much guilt as the Germans, and that their nation's actions were not entirely reasonable & prudent.
>justifying theft
>Selfishness is great when I can pretending it's altruism

>>53722376
>When was this proved again?
When people were unable to definitively prove that any of the known morality systems is empirically correct. If one of them were correct, somebody would have been ale to prove it by now.

>>53722169
Sauron is, by definition, far more evil than the average Orc. His lack of concern with what he would perceive as the squabbling of animals is not comparable to a peasant who felt that's it's not his place or in his interest to intervene.

Unless you believe peasants are morally equivalent to Sauron.

>>53722379
>telling the people of Ireland that they should feel just as much guilt as the Germans because all evil acts are equivalent
>entirely reasonable & prudent actions can never be even a little evil
>Selfishness is great when I can pretending it's altruism
Literally where are you getting any of this?

>justifying theft
I wasn't justifying theft, I was pointing out how it can be evil and yet a reasonable & prudent action.

>>53722408
>If one of them were correct, somebody would have been ale to prove it by now.
When was this concluded again?
I am curious as to how this conclusion was brought to consensus.