D&D 5E GMs of EN World: What player behavior annoys you the most?

Players that waste my time, money, and efforts. Which is honestly half the group lately. But here is my #1 pet peeve. Player A.... Well when its his turn he has to then decide what to do, if he uses an ability he has to look it up since he can't remember what it did from using it 15 minute prior. Every attack he has to put his glasses back on, find his character sheet, look up his bonuses, then roll. Well first he has to find his dice. Then he rolls dice as slow as possible, one at a time. If its rolling at Adv/Dis he rolls them one at a time, and has to double check what his bonus is since he apparently forgot from last round. Oh don't forget before he looks he has to find his reading glasses and put them back on! After all he has a lot of heavy political commentary to fit in between actions. *beats head off desk* Well I guess he's better than his brother, Player B, who has to be told by the rest of the table to use his various special abilities since apparently in between rounds he's like the guy from Momento and his short term memory erases and he forgets that a 10th level Paladin can attack twice, or use certain abilities. Its to the point where I'm going to start giving a cut of his XP to other players who mostly play his PC for him...

I think I just need a break for a couple weeks but I really want to get OotA finished since I'm so sick of running this pile of...stuff. It looks like next week will be a break so I just need to get though this week. Lately as I paint miniatures and work up terrain stuff I wonder if its even worth it.

A couple of good ones so far (the guy who always plays the anti-social jerk because "that's my character" is also near the top of my list).

But another one is the nit-picker. I like to run fast paced descriptive games. In addition, I regularly tweak monsters to fit my story or to implement some theatrical vision.

So I'll describe what the players are seeing, not explicitly stating what is happening from a rules point of view. The nit-picker want me to explain. Every. Detail.

Some examples

• Why are you rolling two dice when you attack?
• That's the third Legendary Save, so we're good to go now!
• But a ____ doesn't ____! It says so right here on page ___ of the MM!
• How could they do that? They used a spell and now they're casting another one! No way!
• I describe a lair action as the BBEG waving his hand causing thorns to wrap around a character after he already used a legendary action to do a different attack, so the Nit-Picker wants to stop the game so we can have a discussion about game mechanics.

I don't cheat as a DM (or if I do it's in favor of the PCs) but I shouldn't have to explain that the spellcaster is really two separate entities that sometimes work in tandem.

PCs may not always understand what's going on or how something works and the players don't always need to either.

Oofta said:

• I describe a lair action as the BBEG waving his hand causing thorns to wrap around a character after he already used a legendary action to do a different attack, so the Nit-Picker wants to stop the game so we can have a discussion about game mechanics.

Click to expand...

Sometimes (but not always) you can cut that discussion short simply by saying "Yes, that is strange, isn't it?". As a signal to the player that what is happening is unusual even from their character's perspective, but it is intentional on your part. And that you aren't going to explain it to them right now.

Player's who try to 'convince' other players how one's character should be played, or even role-played. Dude, back off, this isn't your character, stop treading on another's agency.

Helpful advice if someone notices another who is missing key features, or using it incorrectly is one thing. Or even trying to work with one another in a quasi-meta way to plan battle moves, but once you start trying to strong arm others into role-playing to benefit how you feel the story should go, it no good. Some times, the party doesn't have to 100% agree on a plan of strategy or what is right or wrong. That kind of conflict can be good, helps the story, and develops character's personalities further.

I'm probably most annoyed by players who don't get the fantastical aspects of fantasy and attempt to constantly insert their understanding of real world history/economics/science into it. Especially when they think that in doing so, they're bringing up some kind of oversight in the world's consistency without realizing that a particular phenomena exists for storytelling/conceptual/fantasy reasons. They want to constantly argue about what should/shouldn't be.

Especially annoying when the phenomena they're questioning has legitimate historical/economic/scientific basis or is based in real world mythology that they just happen to be ignorant about it.

Li Shenron said:

On the top of my list of worst behaviours I would put either rules lawyering, or wanting to play a character that can do anything... "jackofalltradeism"?

Click to expand...

Not that it's anywhere near the top of my list, but one of my pet peeves is when players try to play superficial characters who can only do one thing.

There's a reason why everyone can use daggers, and why everyone carries a dagger. If your wizard or barbarian never actually uses their dagger for anything, then something has gone wrong. (To be fair to players, though, a lot of that can be blamed on game mechanics which discourage anyone from attempting anything they aren't hyper-specialized in.)

Mine is when a player builds an intentionally weak character because story. This happens more when flaws are allowed, but it's always been annoying.

More to player in game behavior, when a player won't figure out why their character would be going along with the adventure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Li Shenron said:

On the top of my list of worst behaviours I would put either rules lawyering, or wanting to play a character that can do anything... "jackofalltradeism"?

Click to expand...

In 3E, I had someone build a pointbuy character with 5 12s and a 14 and was then upset when his character was constantly being outshined by others (it didn't help he was a monk).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I hear you. It's been two years of running it for me, and I'm most likely at the last two sessions, and I'm ready to move on to something new.

Anyway, my player pet peeves. There’s the usual – cheating and rules lawyering rarely make anyone’s day. But outside of that:

• Making the same dang character, campaign after campaign. How does this not get boring? As a DM, it certainly makes me have to work harder when there’s nothing new for me to springboard off of.
• Deliberate monkey-wrenching of the game. I’ve no time for people that try to exert control over the game by sabotage and trying to make the game solely about their character.

Flexor the Mighty! said:

I think I just need a break for a couple weeks but I really want to get OotA finished since I'm so sick of running this pile of...stuff.

Click to expand...

iserith said:

Mine is undoubtedly when players can't find a reason for their characters to trust and get along with other characters and/or can't imagine why the character would want to pursue the adventure hook or participate in particular scenes.

It's an offshoot of the "It's what my character would do..." issue. Well, sweetheart, maybe you should start making characters that do get along and trust fellow PCs and do participate.

I combat this issue by helping the players establish ties between their characters and the adventure scenario so as to create the necessary context for said players to participate in good faith.

Click to expand...

I'll take this one step further. I had this kind of player at my table who would then go on to find ways to betray or sell out the party. Right down to wanting to make deals with the villains sometimes. This person no longer plays at my table and is also the cause of some house rules. Really grinds my gears.

It's also a pet peeve of mine when you have a players who doesn't pay attention, like being on their phone, and then when called upon to act asks what's going on. The rest of the group keeps up just fine. The game session isn't on your phone, so put it away.