Pet peeves of D&D gaming

[Herpes Cineplex]

I do that, because I prefer not to railroad the the players. Unfortunately, many of them never seem to want to take the initiative and act, so I end up constantly prodding them along.

Yeah, but do you have absolutely nothing happening in the game world that isn't initiated solely by the PCs? As in, a PC who has no particular goal in mind at this point asks what's going on, and you just shrug and say "Uh...lots of stuff...what do you want to do?"

Being reactive isn't actually a bad thing at all, but somehow in the rush to encourage players to take the initiative, it seems to have gotten a bad reputation. The fact is, having a game where the GM has plots and situations and events planned that can be presented to the PCs is hardly railroading; it's giving PCs something to do, it's helping show off the cool parts of the setting, and ultimately it's the kind of thing that will get even inordinately reactive characters to start thinking in terms of what they want to do.

You at least seem to be doing the smart thing, which is recognizing when the PCs aren't going to be proactive and immediately taking steps to nudge them along. Me, I like it when a GM nudges me, especially if it's by having something happen or pointing my character towards something interesting.

It's so much better than the alternative; good lord, the number of times I've been in the game where the GM has decided to try to "fix the problem" by staring the players down until one of them does something (usually something uninteresting, nonsensical, or self-destructive) out of sheer desperation...

--
bonus points if you give the pc a situation he'd never have sought out on his own

 

[ChrisWaller]

~BBEGs that you can't beat! When the last player standing manages to score a 20 and back it up with a second 20, the last thing the DM should say is "okay, he takes double damage."
~Players that show up drunk or stoned. Sure, I've played a couple of sessions that were just an excuse for a party, but if everybody else is looking to play a game don't spoil it.
~Player's that forget things. In one group it got so bad that I routinely showed up with three extra pencils, sets of dice, and character sheets! And I wasn't the guy running the game.

There's only one thing that I can think of that I do to annoy other players: I fudge die rolls. This goes both ways though. Sure I've pulled a miracle out of my dice bag on occasion, but I'm just as likely to wiff if I think the situation calls for it.
A case in point: We're fighting a villian that I know one of the other player's wants really badly. I roll a crit, which would have easily been the death blow. So I nudge the die and mutter "damn, missed." The guy next to me just about blew a gasket.

 

[wingsandsword]

Prefab modules that presume the party will suddenly realize something, or will just automatically go in a specific direction. I'm running a game now, using a lot of pre-fab modules and have found that it's like herding cats when the module presumes "at this point the PC's will realize that their best lead is to go to *blah*" when they've already ruled that out as a trick/trap (and honestly, with the way the modules are written, I agree).

Prefab modules that are so cliche that experienced players can walk right through them. In a prior campaign, when I tried to use prefab modules, but one player had run through so many old Dungeon modules that she could deduce the outcome and all the plot twists less than an hour into the module. A lot of pregen modules are so formulaic I think they take a template and just add new backdrops/NPC's/setting elements.

GM's who have a "Pet" PC. Worse than a Pet NPC, the Pet PC can do no wrong. In one political game I was in once, the Pet PC (PC'ed by the GM's fiancee) knew everone elses plots and plans. If you told the GM what you were doing, she automatically knew what it was and countered it. Trying to counter her plans would be doomed to failure, and if you managed to uncover her secrets, you mysteriously died that night in your sleep. Now, the GM loved Railroading, and I think he used Pet PC's (he's had them in all of his campaigns), to enforce railroading, but it just strikes me as unfair and biased.

GM Favoritism. The GM's got his best friends/lovers and they can do no wrong. They aren't attacked as often by monsters, they randomly get good fortune or favors from NPC's, and miraculously they can play the rare/exotic character types while everyone else plays average characters who get killed off regularly and live to be the side-characters in the story of the favored PC's.

Railroading, everyone else has sounded off for it, but I've got to speak my peace too. When the GM has written the whole plot of the adventure in advance, and nobody can steer it any other way, it's less like playing a tabletop game and more like a low-tech CRPG, or worse yet, watching a movie where you roll dice (in the more extreme cases of railroading).

Wannabe Novels. Some GM's are aspiring writers, and it's pretty obvious they are using their games as a testing ground for their novel characters/plots. Sometimes they even admit they are writing a novella/novel/serial based on the campaign, but they of course edit everything to make the PC's exactly how he wants them (assuming he didn't force it like that up front). I think this is related to railroading.

"Because I'm the GM and I say so". GM's who don't explain their arbitrary rulings. Disallow some spells, feats, classes, sure, but I'd appreciate some words on why. They aren't thematic for the setting, just tell me. There is a storyline reason and you have to find out in game, sure. But when the GM acts like a soveriegn Lord & Master who hands down arbitrary edicts to the lowly players. Gaming isn't feudalism, it's a partnership.

"But the rules say I can." The other side of the coin of "Because I'm the GM". Players who try and cram rules down the GM's throat and assume that because something has been published, it's in the game, and because they meet all the prereqs they can take any feat or class out there. Some things aren't right for all games (but the GM needs to say up front what is or isn't allowed, and preferably give a reason). That and people who try and rules-lawyer the GM in the middle of a fight (especially over little things).

People on either side of the screen who treat Alignment as a straightjacket. "You can't do that, that would be against your alignment", or "I can't do that, it would violate my alignment". Alignment reflects how your character normally acts, normally lawful people do chaotic acts occasionally, chaotic characters can act lawful enough to keep out of trouble most of the time, evil characters aren't beyond an occasional act of charity, and good characters aren't free of vice or sin. Unless you are under alignment restrictions or a code of conduct, play your character as you wish, and let your alignment reflect your actions (if you are under restrictions, play your character, and try and play him within those limits, and your alignment shouldn't matter)

People who try and use Chaotic Neutral (or evil) alignment as a blanket excuse to act however they want (and typically act chaotic evil in the process). Reasons like that are why I don't allow Evil or CN characters in my games.

 

[Bloodsparrow]

- Players and DMs who either get all pouty and/or have a tantrum when things are not "going their way".

- DMs who attempt to force you to play your character a particular way, or who try to play your character for you.

 

[KnightOfTheWhiteRose]

Telling your DM that you have to work on cretin nights of the week and having the rest of the group being ok with that and then the group role-plays on the nights you work, and then have the DM thinking about kicking you out of the group because you never show up because you are working.

Players the make the same character over and over again. (Like an Elven Archer)
Players that only play characters from the oriental line of products.
DMs that don’t know how the CR system works.
Players and DMs that take things in game as personal attacks.
Having any one in my group that reads this will take it as a personal attack.
Players that only thing in terms of game rules
Players and DMs that can’t act civil during the game

Making a character that’s wants to “role-play” things and being told my character sucks because I did not mid-max my character like everyone else.

and a list a mile long

 

[tetsujin28]

In all honesty? I wouldn't have time for rping if it was as frustrating to me as some of your experiences seem to be to you. I'd be off, I dunno, playing hockey. Or even cricket. Or drinking beer. Anything but something that caused me that much grief.

 

[clockworkjoe]

edit nm

 

[ThoughtBubble]

Allright. I have several major traits that make me less than endearing.
The cone of silence: I have this ability to take a deep breath, and make an almost touchable aura of quiet and peace. I usually use it when I get started, causing the group to be sucked in and feel too hushed to say anything.
Fairly easily frusterated: If something doesn't work after the second time, I begin to stop trying, by the third or fourth, I give up and never look back. So, oftentimes, the game degrades as fewer things persent themselves as options. Actually suffering from this now (about a session no-show).
I like being the center of attention as well. It doesn't have to be all the time, but I really like to feel important. If I don't, my behavior slowly degenerates into fairly bland mush (roll the die, do an action, wait around for something to happen, repeat).

My primary pet peeve is when I'm given false/misleading information. This has happened twice in a row now when I've joined games. In either instance, the game was going to have a specific slant (ie: Heavy character interaction and development, or dungeoneering and fighting) that didn't occur. In both times I wound up creating a character who very drastically didn't fit with the game and spent a large amount of time running into walls as I tried to work within an incorrect pre-concept of the game's style.

Here's a couple of other complaints:
People who complain about the lack of something in game without ever trying to find opertunities to find it. ie: "NPC's are so boring," says the guy who never talks to anyone. "We don't work together so I never get any chances to sneak attack" says the rogue who refuses to talk to the other party members about getting some help.

People who play characters that they don't enjoy. Voluntarially. All the time.

People who don't play to the game type. You know the guy who, in an over the top action game is trying to convince the party to find out if CAPTIAN EVIL THE OVERLORD OF DOOM is really evil by not destroying the megasuper weapon and talking to him instead. Or the guy who, when he finds out the game is a set of military operations wants to play a pacifist expert who's opposed to the war.

People who complain about being weak when they've got a whole ton of magical gear they never use (charge hoarding).

Out of character talking that interrupts in game action. OOC is fine, just not while someone's doing something in the game.

edit: sentences are good.

 

[Goddess FallenAngel]

Number one: People who assume that just because I am dating the DM that I get special treatment/priviledges. Trust me, I don't. Some people can seperate their personal life from affecting the game.

Number two: People who can't seperate their personal lives from gaming, or who assume that just because their other DM does/did X, this one will as well. For example, people who have a bad day, so all of a sudden their character is being a jerk. Or people who assume that since their old DM allowed them to play a half-dragon, all other DMs should as well.

Number three: Players who obviously don't want to play the class/alignment/etc that they are playing, because they keep making OOC comments. For example, I've gamed with a player who was playing a half-celestial paladin, who kept making OOC comments about actions that would be totally opposite to the character and about becoming a blackguard. The player even admitted that the character wouldn't do that. But still the comments came.

Number four: Players who just can't let it go. Who have to argue a ruling or look up rule X after the DM has made a decision. *guily of this one*

Number five: The "I shoot it" syndrome. I gamed with a player who was playing an elven archer. Everytime we got to the "big encounter" of a quest (met the BBEG, etc), the DM would be obviously setting up for a roleplaying encounter, or at least a little dialog before the battle (that all of us besides this particular player were awaiting with baited breath) he would shoot at the BBEG before anyone could say anything or even react. The DM hadn't even called for initiative yet. His favorite words were "I shoot it".

There's more, but most of them are repeats of what has already been said.

 

[Nighthawk]

I have only one true peeve as a player: gms and players that are too concerned with characters other than their own pcs and/or npcs. While I can understand thinking about what motivates another pc or npc (and other personal things), I do not see it as necessary to keep pushing the issue so that one's own personal beliefs override another's views. It's been a tad too common IME.

As a gm, I also only have one true peeve: those folk who do not treat others with the common courtesies they wish to be treated with.

Other than those two peeves, nothing else is all that notable. Gaming is a social occasion for myself, so I suspect that dominates my opinions.