Was I unfair?

>>54468497
The NPCs playing sensibly is not wrong.
Moreover, if the paladin and monk both totally lacked ranged combat options, that's their fault and they should fix that.

>>54468497
The monk is a dipshit.
You were only wrong in your choice of system.

>>54468497
>Monk is whispering to me that it's unfair that both Oni's aren't attacking the Paladin even though they're both right next to each other
What was his rationale for this?

>Monk says I was making the game completely unfair, too difficult, and that I should account for the player's class into account because the Warlock/Rogue were the only ranged characters.
I don't understand what this is supposed to mean. It sounds like he's suggesting that only half the party being ranged makes them weaker, and therefore unable to handle the encounters you're throwing at them (eg tanks are useless and/or he dun goofed picking monk). I suspect this was not actually the intention.

>>54468787
>I don't understand what this is supposed to mean. It sounds like he's suggesting that only half the party being ranged makes them weaker, and therefore unable to handle the encounters you're throwing at them (eg tanks are useless and/or he dun goofed picking monk). I suspect this was not actually the intention.
He was saying that the GM can't use flying enemies unless the entire party is ranged attackers so flying doesn't matter.
Which is of course bullshit.

>>54468807
remind him that you are playing a game that is trying to emulate an actual world rather a "balanced" videogame. there is absolutely no reason flying monsters would suddenly stop existing because he's too retarded to bring a ranged weapon

>>54468787
OP here. He's brought up multiple times that I "pick on him". Supposedly I metagame and choose him because his AC is lower. However, he's faster than the dwarf so he gets in faster and that's usually my rationale.

This time the paladin and him were right next to each other. Apparently he wasn't having fun going down so often so I should have...idk, taken it easy on him? From my perspective having one attack each was actually more fair and strategically sound from the enemy's perspective because it put less pressure on the paladin

>>54468910
tell him its not your fault his character is shit

if you actually wanna remedy the situation id suggest sitting together with the player to try and improve his system mastery so that he can deal with basic things like flying enemies and stuff hitting him

but it sounds like the player is a shithead who whines whenever things dont go his way

>>54468910
Your player is retarded and/or has a decidedly different idea of how a game should run than you.

Specifically, he seems to be going for a fairly self-centered narrative approach- eg enemies don't attack him much because he's squishy and therefore can't handle it. This is of course the exact opposite of a more objective simulationist approach- eg enemies attack him first because he's squishy and therefore can't handle it. You seem to be either somewhat in the middle or just simulating foes to be a little on the mindless side, where enemies are equally likely to attack a heavily armored paladin as a lightly armored monk (and don't seem interested in rushing the true back lines).

So from his perspective, having enemies attack him even though he's squishy is equivalent to giving everyone an equal share of money even though he hasn't gotten as much- it's unfair, unfun, and unresponsive to his needs. You may wish to discuss the game's theme and tone with him, because if you feel differently this disconnect is going to cause friction that can't really be resolved any other way.

As a point of trivia, his use of "metagaming" to mean "I don't want it to happen, therefore NPCs should be completely blind to obvious characteristics of the world" triggers my jimmies something fierce. I assume he's saying dumb shit because he's grasping at straws more than because he genuinely believes that, but who knows.

>>54468497
>>Monk says I was making the game completely unfair, too difficult, and that I should account for the player's class into account because the Warlock/Rogue were the only ranged characters.
He has a point. Surely encounters should be tweaked for the party?

>>54468730
>if the paladin and monk both totally lacked ranged combat options, that's their fault and they should fix that.
Also a good point, but these ARE newbies.

Sit the monk down and remind them that you're playing with character deaths and that actions have consequences.
All else fails, drop the annoying shit.

>>54468910

You're dealing with a sore loser who feels like a failure unless they're 'beating' DnD. This is a character flaw with deep roots that aren't always easily dealt with. I've seen players like this just up and ragequit when they run out of other things to blame. Other times people have chilled out once they realize it's not all such a big deal. Your only real option is to talk it out, make your case, and explain why things happened that way. Some DMs will pander to a player like this by going easy on them or completely changing their DMing style - I'd say that's only worthwhile if the player is vital to the group for some non-game-related reason, and even then I'd hate doing it.

I run my games like >>54468886 says. I explain to players beforehand that I don't make prescripted, scientifically-balanced encounters designed for them to beat, I just use the kinds of monsters and obstacles that would logically be in the area. I'm not going to send the party up against anything way out of their league (unless the players do that of their own accord) and the quests they're offered will be things I think they can handle, but I don't artificially level the game environment. It's up to the players to prepare, which includes research & recon, making sure they have a wide array of combat and problem-solving options, hiring extra help if they need it, using shenanigans to make things easier, and making sure they have an escape strategy for if/when things go wrong. Setting out my stall beforehand so that players know where they stand helps a lot, and anyone who really hates this kind of game doesn't have to get dragged in with false expectations.

OP again. Thanks for the good advice guys. We've let the tension cool a little and I think a lot of frustration is coming from another player not really strategizing or being engaged. I'm going to talk it over with the party tomorrow if they want to proceed in the "simulation" way that I like to play or if something needs to change.

>>54468497
>Tienfling monk
Pfffhahahaha, good start
>Kenku
wut?
>so they fly over the Moonbeam
Double wut?

>>54469744
Moonbeam description and mechanics are different, is not an infinite long cilinder, is actually short as fuck, so you can totally fly over it, fuck, even jump it if my memory serves me right the height is a non issue

>>54468497
So was the problem that the Obi were flying, or that one was attacking the monk?

I don't think you're at fault in either case. For flight, the Monk could easily carry a Sling and use it when needed, or throw knives or something. The Paladin likewise can carry handaxes, javelins, or have a Halberd as a backup for reach.

As far as attacking is concerned, monks are a frontline class. If he wanted to avoid getting struck, he should have spent a bit of Ki dodging to try and get the Oni's focus off of him.

>>54468497
>Was I in the wrong? I don't think so, I think the monk is being a dipshit but I could be biased

The Monk is being a dipshit and worse yet; a sore loser.
If I'm reading this correctly, why would enemies, "account for the players class" to the players benefit? The enemies wants to win just as badly as the players do, so why would they ever do anything that would handicap them?

It's not "supposed" to be fair: they're the home invaders.

>>54469853
>monks are a frontline class
Should is not the same as are. Monks aren't frontliners, they have mediocre HD and mediocre AC, even worse if you're a tiefling (+2 Cha +1 Int) monk.

>>54468497
The only time a monster should "account for a players class" is lvl 1-3 when the wizard can get 1 shot by an orc. Otherwise enemies choose targets based on context and intelligence. Does he expect creatures to only hit him with DEX save spells and save all the WIS saves for the Paladin? Fuck off

>>54469941
Never allow Tieflings... Never

>>54469973
PHB race

>>54469941
Either way, if he's sticking close and staying in the monster's face, it's reasonable to expect to be hit. All the more reason he should take Mobile to be able to slip out of range, or otherwise work to make himself less of an appealing threat instead of going for max damage and wondering why the monsters are focusing on him.

The player having a suboptimal race/class combo doesn't excuse him from later attack. At most, it means the DM should dial down encounters slightly when designing them, or give him a magic item to make up for it.

Did he try using Hellish Rebuke on the Oni? That mat have helped make them think twice about attacking the guy who blasts fire when struck.

>>54469989
In the 'uncommon races' section that's set up specifically so DMs have an easy way to exclude them.

Maybe they didn't get what deathly game meant. Also if you go for that kind of game with new and inexperienced players, don't allow them to take subpar options.

Dude seems a little whinny for assuming you were targetting him and only him. Though Onis, being as smart as they're, probably would think of getting rid of the casters first.

File: spin em.jpg (41KB, 680x383px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 680x383px

>>54469853
>the Obi were flying

>>54470014
>Only one feat at 6th level
>Tiefling so 14 AC at the very best
>Instead of rising that to 15 or 16 pick mobile
He's dead either way, I tried to play tiefling shadowmonks to copy nightcrawler and all met an early demise over how shitty their AC is, no matter how smart you played them

>>54469973

I'd sooner have Tieflings than elves. Any elves. Or halflings for that matter. Not even a contest.

>>54470014
>The player having a suboptimal race/class combo doesn't excuse him from later attack
Didn't even imply the opposite, I was just informing that the dude wasn't made to be a frontline in the slightless

>>54470061
Gnomes and Halflings, kill them all.

>>54470059
Yeah, personally I houserule to give monks the benefit of Mobile as a more default thing, since they really need it to function.

I will say though that I was interpreting the player's complaint as being less about the fact that he picked a subpar class with a worse race alongside a better class (paladin) with a more synergistic race. I had assumed it was a complaint along the lines of 'why aren't they attacking the tank like in muh MMOs?'

If it's simply a balance issue, the DM should be working to correct that with magic monk belts and stuff, but he isnt obligated to not have enemies swing at the guy.

Also, when playing with newbies, always repeat stuff several times. Emphasize the style of the game and if you aren't going to pull any punches, tell them straight.

>>54470129
>magic monk belts
No such a thing so far unless you meant DM fiat them.
Bracers of armor, but those are rare as fuck for a 6th level group.

>>54470160
Yeah, I exactly meant for the DM to homebrew something. Who relies on default magic items in 5e of all things? It's not like the players will be shopping for them anyway.

My point is more that the best time for a DM to try and balance out a strong and weak character isn't mid-combat. They can make suggestions and alterations during character creation. They can design scenarios that will be better for one character over another during prep. They can offer bonuses for one character during play to help them keep up. And while they can favor one over another during combat, OP is at no fault for not doing so, since that often comes off as feelibg contrived when enemies never attack the monk even as he runs in first and doesnt do anything to defend himself.

I had that happen in a game where a fellow player would win initiative on their monk, run up to the nearest enemy and flurry, then get knocked down since the enemies rolled better than the rest of us who couldn't match his speed.

At a certain point, playing smarter won't help, but that's again the point where the DM needs to simply fiddle with numbers rather than making enemies dumber.

>>54470279
>At a certain point, playing smarter won't help

I don't believe in this. Certainly, there's a point where more tactical skill in the combat section won't help, but that's not the only way to even up the odds.

>>54469989
>PHB race
Did you have a point? DM > Rulebook every single time.

>>54470061
Elves are obnoxious but as a PC Race they don't attract as much trash. Also I've never seen a shitty player pick halfling or gnome

>>54470355
Doesn't matter how smart you're with your Wot4E tiefling monk, you either are a dead weight and always fall back, which causes the party to die, or you try to help and fail and die.

>>54470407
>DM > Rulebook every single time.
Did you have a point? What I do > What you do every single time.

>Elves are obnoxious but as a PC Race they don't attract as much trash. Also I've never seen a shitty player pick halfling or gnome
Non issue, I never seen a friend or family member die of Cancer and don't think it isn't a problem.

Also, and more to the point, shitty players will be shitty no matter you allow tieflings or not. A cunt will be a cunt even with human and fighter only.

>>54470459
You seem pretty dense so I'll spell it out

DM chooses what races exist in his campaign setting. Whether or not it is in the PHB is irrelevant

No one implied it was impossible for a halfling to be a shitty player, just that tieflings are shitty player lightning rods

>>54470355
But that's true though. At a point, there's no more tactical and careful you can be, aside from just not fighting at all. You can bring a ranged weapon, hang back and dodge more, but at a point it won't help if your character isn't built properly.

>>54470505
No, playing with shitty players is shitty player lightning rods
Also personal experiences, in mines is dwarves

>>54470533
wrong, not even him
stop being retarted

>>54470631
Races dont' make bad players, no matter what you allow a bad players is going to be a bad player. If you believe otherwise you have a problem.

Also, lets assume 1 out of 10 players is a shitty players, are you going to hinder the other 9's fun just in case you attract a 1 shitty player? Seems like a retard strategy. And if, according to you, tiefling is a lightning rod for shitty players, the better, that way you can spot them faster.

>>54470689
They do, if shit like Aasimars, Tieflings, Warlocks, Monks, Drows and Dragonborn didn't exist there wouldn't be shitty players

>>54468497
Him bitching about them attacking him is dumb, but flying, invisible and so on enemies can be really tough to deal with. Once faced invisible flying enemies that had ranged attacks and if in a specific portion of the room had resistance to all damage, which meant we had 3 different gimmicks that we had to pass through before being able to fight them. Damage resistance and stuff is fine and not a big impact, but flying and invisibility in particular can be absolutely massive in some contexts. I will say though, your default jump height is 3+str so at least the paladin can jump 5 ft up and make his attacks, and the monk can just disengage to get out if he can't deal with tanking, and if he wants to man up one of the early thingies allows you to double jump height so he would also be able to attack them.

You may be slightly in the wrong if the players asked to jump and attack, or do some other improvised actions, and you forbid it. But as it reads, none of them thought of things in-universe and just assumed they couldn't improvise something/use fringe rules to their advantage, which is on them. Once they realized there were flying enemies they also should have considered whether they could fight that, as it's more obvious and easier to disengage from than someone who suddenly casts greater invis.

>>54470743
You can jump and attack? no other edition of D&D allowed you to do that (in fact forbid it) unless you had feats or spells that allowed you to do that

>>54470528
>rollplayer only thinking in terms of the combat minigame

I feel bad for you. I feel bad for your group. I feel bad for your DM.

>>54470730
As someone who played in a core only 3.PF game a few years ago., a shitty player isn't going to let a little thing like races get in the way of their need to be the absolute worse at the fucking table.

Those things don't cause players to become shitty, shitty players will be shitty regardless of what you do or do not allow.

>>54470791
No, stop being dumb

>>54470777
>roleplayer pretending that D&D isn't built around combat.

I feel bad for you. I feel bad for your group. I feel bad for your DM.

>>54470770
>no other edition of D&D allowed you to do that (in fact forbid it)
I think you might need to look again.

>>54470791
no, anon I already told you

>>54470810
You first. Better yet, stop playing with shitty people in the first place.

>>54470821
Ok, 2nd, 3rd. 3.5 and 4th didn't allow you to do that without feats, class features or spells that outright told you to do that

>>54470833
But I don't, I don't allow Tiefling, Dragonborn, Aasimar, Drows, Monks and Warlocks so I'm safe

>>54470770
As 5e strays away from making options only available after you take a feat and such, and because it counts towards your movement, I would think so. Idk how each exact edition does movement and attacking but in 5e you can attack at any time during moving so that wouldn't be a problem either. After looking it up, the distance is halved if you don't have a running start, so the pally should have a standing high jump height of ~3" and then 1.5 his height of reach beyond that, which should still work.

>High Jump. When you make a high jump. you leap into the air a number of feet equal to 3 + your Strength modifier if you move at least 10 feet on foot immediately before the jump. When you make a standing high jump, you can jump only half that distance. Either way, each foot you clear on the jump costs a foot of movement. In some circumstances. your DM might allow you to make a Strength (Athletics) check to jump higher than you normally can. Voucan extend your arms half your height above yourself during the jump. Thus, you can reach above you a distance equal to the height of the jump plus 1.5 times your height.

>>54470860
Sure you are anon.

>>54470840
>2nd
I don't see anything in the movement section that says you can't jump and then attack.

>>54470730
If you don't have Dragonborn or Tieflings, you'll still get people trying to be Dragons by being human fighter/wizards with Burning Hands raised by Dragons. People who want to be tieflings will still pick something opressed with an edgy class and try to deal with a demon if able.

>>54470730
Here's your (You)

>tiefling player is a whiny bitch grasping at straws

Well at least he wasn't a kender I guess.

>>54470730
"People" like you need to fuck off back to WoW where your kind belong.

>Current character is a Tiefling fighter. And Champion no less.

DM loves having me around as the face/leader of the party. Guess I'm a shitty player for not playing a hurrdurr optimized cookie cutter that meets the DEF cap, right? Will my aggro number be high enough if I don't get my build from Icyveins?

>15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8
>For monk would be best: 12, 15, 13, 8, 14, 10
>Add Tiefling: 12, 15, 13, 9, 14, 12
>AC 14, 9 HPs
I'm surprised he reached 6th level

>>54471003
>Talks about WoW
>Doesn't consider himself a shitty player
Kek, well, you play a tiefling, of course you're a shitty player. Not even playing something normal like fighter is going to save your group from your that guyness

>>54471045
>Uses "kek"

Methinks this one protests too much.

>>54471014
Monk is kind of fucked in that a race that doesn't at least give it a +1 to dex leaves it absurdly shit for a few levels

>>54471014
Anon, I feel it is important to tell you that if a players has a functioning brain, it is entirely possible for them to do things like beat the Tomb of Horrors at first level.

>>54471134
While they are very ability dependent, any class wants 16 main stat at level 1.

>>54468497
You play a shit system, but you were never in the wrong as a GM.

>>54471162
Anon, I feel it is important to tell you that a) tomb of horrors in 5e is gutted beyond believe and b) a lot of the traps were designed in a way that fucked you over for thinking like a normal person.

>>54471306
I wasn't talking about 5e ToH.

>make a tiefling monk
>absolutely no synergy
>probably doesn't even roll his stats

you're toast, why would you do such a thing

>>54471352
Ah, well point (b) still stands.

why don't you design an actual hard encounter and see how they behave when they die

>>54471003
>outs himself as a /v/tard
>telling anyone to fuck off
Fuck off retard. /v/ is the biggest cancer on /tg/ right now

>>54471760
/tg/ is the biggest cancer on /tg/ right now.

/v/, /pol/, /d/, and whatever other boogieman people try to pin the blame on are symptoms of a disease that caused us to lose practically everything that made this place great.

I can count like three D&D hate threads in the past 24 hours but not one thread where genuine OC is being made.

That's a major problem for a board that prides itself on games that (supposedly) favors creativity and out-the-box thinking.

File: 2e on low ability scores.png (476KB, 677x557px) Image search: [Google]

476KB, 677x557px

>>54471373
You're probably right, given the simplest known solutions are a fuckton of sheep and charming an Ogre Magus. Pic is what I was trying to go for.

>>54471806
always going to be embittered people here, since /tg/ gone through so many generations/balkanizations/purging of users, compared to the others.
and you know exactly why "genuine OC" isn't posted anymore.

>>54471842
The thing is, 2e also doesn't put as much of an emphasis on having good stats in comparison to 3.PF onwards.

A character with a 9 is statistically no worse than a character with a 15 since most of your ability score modifiers won't kick in until like 16+.

In 3.PF onwards, a character with a 9 has statistically less chance of passing the rolls that are required by his class than a character with a 15, especially in games like 3.PF where your ability scores can potentially lock you out of important feats, prevent you from hitting the AC of monsters that are supposed to be within your weight class, and force you to be behind the curve in comparison to characters that build characters with average or better stats.

It's a shame but it's something that you're not going to fix just by "roleplaying" it away unless the DM does heavily tweaks to keep you on the same scale as the rest of the party.

>>54471893
>you know exactly why "genuine OC" isn't posted anymore.
Yeah, I do.

It's because most times when someone generates OC, they end up getting ran out of /tg/ because everyone here is locked with their heads so far up their assholes, if someone creates OC that they don't like, it's their sworn duty to shit on the artist day-and-night until they end up leaving for greener pastures.

It also doesn't help that at one point in time, people could have their threads deleted for "off-topic" shit, even when it was related to a thing that they were discussing that wasn't actually violating any rules, which ended up causing large swathes of the community to leave or be driven away as well.

I mean, it's ludicrous how a board that prides itself on valuing roleplay and creativity ends up driving away most of the folks responsible for the board's roleplay and creativity threads.

>>54468497
To avoid this in the future:
>2+ PCs are all next to a thing.
>"Thing attacks..."
>Quick roll behind the screen.
>"Player A."

You don't even have to look at the die. Just the act of rolling, from a player perspective, makes everything more random and okay.

>>54471842
I played a character with highest score a 15 and second highest a 11. Played "too safe" to the point of group considering me a That Guy. Died 3 times before reaching 4th level, ended with Con 4 before I said fuck it all to the game (GM wasn't fond of changing characters because "muh chosen ones, entire game resolves around specifically these PCs"

So no, playing smart or safe isn't an insta win with low stats in a non kindergarder game.

>>54472057
I had bad experiences with that
>Me: I attack, deal X damage
>Other anon: I attack, deal 5xX damage
>GM: Monster attacks you, anon
>Me: ?...ok, well, in my turn I attack, shit I faild
>Other anon: I attack, I deal 5xX damage
>GM: Monster attacks you, anon
>Me: ? ok, this is bus
Literally in my last game, we both have similar AC (23 him, 22 me), but he hit with every attack and even crit twice, I missed with almost everything, yet the monster always target me? the fuck?

Now that I think of it, they always seem to charge me first

>>54471930
5e technically has a fair bit more support for this, both by less scaling and relying on the variance of the d20, but also in the advantage/disadvantage system. If you have low dex and try to shoot a guy but set yourself up well and play it clever, advantage can be as good and even better than a +4 on that roll (8 vs. 16 ability score). There are other things that rely on stats and it's definitely still much more reliant on it than OSR games, but it's not as bad as 3.PF.

>>54472110
To be exact numbers were
Me first time: 15
Other anon first time: 62
Other anon second time: 59

>>54472008
/tg/ is an empty shell and will never be restored to its former, lewd glory.
>>54472172
GM must have been hitting on you

>>54472120
The problem with (dis)advantage is that outside of specific abilities which grants them, the game doesn't really go into much detail as far as when they should be applied to a situation beyond "DM fiat."

If the DM ain't buying it, it doesn't matter how well you set yourself up or play it clever, the DM could just arbitrarily decide "no, you wouldn't be able to do that because your DEX is too low" and force you to roll with disadvantage instead, assuming they even let you roll at all.

Granted, it's a great idea in theory but in practice, it doesn't really affect much unless you're a class like a spellcaster who can give yourself advantage every round at the cost of a spell.

>>54472236
One cantrip actually

>>54472236
>the game doesn't really go into much detail as far as when they should be applied to a situation beyond "DM fiat."
Yeah that's why I say "technically". It can support those things, it has a framework for doing so, but there are few to no guidelines and certainly no hard rules, so it's still all up to the gm. Also what cantrip gives you advantage every round? Do you mean the one that is the only worse one than blade ward?

>>54472317
>It can support those things, it has a framework for doing so, but there are few to no guidelines and certainly no hard rules, so it's still all up to the gm.
Which is a major problem with 5e in a nutshell. Has plenty of interesting ideas that could fundamentally change the way that the game is played, and yet they leave everything so fucking vague that most people will ignore it like it doesn't exist.

>>54472405
But isn't that the whole point of 3d20?

>>54472454
5e doesn't use 3d20 unless I'm misunderstanding what that stands for?

>>54472482
Oh. You understood fine. 3d20 take the middle, take the higher one with advantage, the lower one with disadvantage. I thought the system came from 5e.

I'm not the guy you were talking though, but been reading your conversation.

>>54468497
>Party: Tiefling monk, Dwarven Paladin, Kenku rogue, Half-elf warlock

First red flag right there. I am so sick of these fucking niggers who think they are allowed to play whatever they want in my campaigns. No, your shitty tengu is not allowed. No, your ratfolk is not allowed. No, your catfolk is not allowed. No, your tiefling is not allowed: that is a literal fucking demonspawn. Why the fuck would that be allowed in any campaign, let alone this one? No, you cannot play a drow. You will be shot on sight on the surface. Half these fuckers don't even read Drizz't so they have no excuse for wanting to play a drow, besides "lol it's different." Fuck different. Here's the thing: your race is the most boring fucking part of your character. Unless you do something interesting with it (which 90% of these stupid cunts don't do), then you are just weighing down the game. When you have a thri-keen, some homebrew furry shit, a tiefling and some fuck who wants to play kender, you know what? Fuck this. I made a setting that actually feels somewhat like the real world because it doesn't have 90 different races running around like it's motherfucking Mos Eisley cantina. It's not my fault that YOU are a bad roleplayer who can't be satisfied playing something out of the core book. Create an interesting character, and you can play as a human for the rest of your RPG career. I had groups that were entirely human yet they had personalities that seemed like real people. But no, no one wants to lump in 30 homebrew races plus 60 official wizards of the coast crapshit races they pump out like chocolate because they know it will keep people entertained and requires zero effort on their part. No DM worth shit wants to spend hours and hours putting that in his world. Play. A. Fucking. Human. You need to EARN the privilege of playing another race, by proving you can competently play a normal character first.

>>54472685
Oh right, I know of it but I've never read a game that uses it, 5e might be where it came from but I'm not sure.

>>54472685
(dis)advantage in 5e is roll 2d20, take the (lower) higher number. I've never heard of 3d20 being used in 5e

>>54468497
Okay, these are Oni? Yes? Traditional Oni?

I'd be more surprised they attacked the Paladin at all. Monsters should prioritize things they know to be threats. I'm also slightly upset nobody cast Dispel Magic to make this fight easier overall.

>>54470095
I'm personally getting rid of both of those and replacing them with a small size nature sprite race, and gnomes were sorta based off that originally anyways

>>54472734

This is the most hilariously mad post I've seen on this board in a long time, thanks.

>>54468910
The best way to address this is to take a two pronged approach. First address that you're not picking on him intentionally, make that clear. Then ask what he thinks should change, and if its unreasonable tell him so. If he needs to improve his character, suggest ways he can do so. If he had the same exposure as a paladin who I assume was in armor, he's playing his character way too liberally. Second, track who you attack at the start of each encounter, just to make sure you're not opening with him every time. Make a point of having some weird encounters that turn around the direction enemies would normally come from. If he throws himself in front of the squishier players thats your example of how its his playstyle at fault. Do that, and you're golden.

>>54471760
I actually haven't touched the likes of Wow in something like three years. I merely use it as the baseline to describes "optimization" retards and rollplayers like you.

>>54473547

Most the opposition to certain races here is from an RP and autism standpoint. Tieflings, kender, sonichu etc attract THAT GUY autismos

>>54468497
Sounds like a pissant. I say dont worry about what he says and just play creatures on a roleplay level, if you werent intentionally targeting him or arbitrary reasons then he has no room to complain.

Piece of advice sounds like you let them get too attached to their characters. Ramp up the difficulty.

File: Character Portrait.jpg (43KB, 564x700px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 564x700px

>>54474874
The vast majority of That Guyism that I've encountered has been committed by rollplayers playing human wizards, sorceres, or other straight arcanist types. Hyper-edgey assassins are another favorite, but still primarily human.

The last drow character I've seen is in the current group. A 5e Monk (oh no!) of the Open Hand with the scholar background from the City of Union. A rather chipper (and scrawny) and easygoing (and possibly mad alchemist) sort that hopes to one day rebuild Spirit Soaring and rededicate it to Mystra and the gods of Knowledge.

I play a tiefling Champion fighter. We also have a set of half-elven twin rogues, a human Cleric of Sune, and a chaotic neutral human warlock.

Guess which one is the asshole every other player wishes would leave the table but won't because he's the DM's older brother.

>>54473271
Lucky feat, a.k.a the best feat.

>>54473322
>Demons shouldn't prioritize divine knights

>>54469781
A silvery beam of pale light shines down in a 5-footradius, 40-foot-high cylinder centered on a point within range. don't know about jumping but flying sure

>>54468497
>Was I in the wrong? I don't think so, I think the monk is being a dipshit but I could be biased

Nah. Monk was just whiny because he didn't have any ranged weapons and wasn't a sun monk.

Which is wierd because monks are great at lvl 6.