D&D 5E What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?

[Fleetwood C. DeVille]

It occurs to me that'd be an interesting experiment sometime: as GM, write out in point form the story you've got in mind for the campaign and seal it in an envelope. Then play the campaign as usual, without undue railroading, and see where it goes. Afterwards, open up the envelope and compare the results. You might be pleasantly surprised.

Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman, call your office.

 

[5ekyu]

I can do all those things without the GM railroading and disregard of player protagonism.

The idea that I would play for 10 to 20 hours just so a GM can set up a long-term villain is (in my view) ludicrous in itself.

Setting up a long-term villain in my 4e game took no play time in two cases (three PCs start as Raven Queen devotees and so Orcus is a long term villain; one PC is a drow who is a member of the Order of the Bat, a secret society dedicated to undoing the sundering of the elves, and so Lolth is a long term villain) and in two other cases has been an emergent result of play rather than a GM fiat (Vecna has taken on the status of long term villain, and also ally; and the Raven Queen has taken on a similar ambiguous status at least in the eyes of some of the PCs).

Your posts are explaining why you enjoy GM-driven RPGing. They're not giving reasons why I, who do not, made some mistake in relation to the three GMing experiences I mentioned.

As always that amorphic buzzzy buzz word "railroading" which basically means "what someone else does that i dont like." contextually practically everytime i see it used.

if the player hitches his wagon to an NPC (let me spell it out Non-Player-Character) then they have given the GM license for that relationship to progress. Whether that be a cleric or a warlock or the various other degrees to which that is in play the possibility of NPC betrayal is always a possibility - its practically a trope - and mostly the entire early career of one Gary Sinese. The man would have been waiting tables except for this role.

So, yeah, a Gm can abuse it or they can use it just like every other tool in the GMs toolkit.

Buty 20+ hours of gaming that in no small part derives from your personal elements of your character's nature - yeah that sounds like just abominable for a player... cannot see how they could stand it.

I swear, sometimes i think some people see "PETron" instead of "patron."

Hmm... new catch phrase "there is no E in patron"

 

[Lanefan]

The idea that I would play for 10 to 20 hours just so a GM can set up a long-term villain is (in my view) ludicrous in itself.

10-20 hours a.k.a 3-5 typical sessions. A trivial amount of time when held up against the many years the campaign is intended to last...

Maybe for your table, but I don't think that's true, however, in this context or in all. Often when I have discussed my own GMing techniques and preferences with Lanefan in the past - including whether to utilize phantoms rolls or not - it was not uncommon for him to remark that (and I paraphrase), "If I did that, then I know that my players would metagame." Those statements imply that the values of the player are not naturally concerned about not metagaming, and that they would "break the system" if given the opportunity.

One or two might try to break things, but that's not the biggest concern - I've got a smackdown hammer to take care of that sort of thing, if needed.

The more common thing I hear from them - and, when I'm a player, will say myself - is that they'd/I'd rather not have to worry at all about sorting out what is player knowledge from what is character knowledge when at all possible. In other words, don't tell us as players anything our characters wouldn't know; and this includes dropping hints like only rolling in this situation as opposed to the other ten seemingly-identical situations preceding and following it.

It also includes doing things like taking the forward scout's player aside and playing her away misson solo such that us other players don't know what's become of her until and unless either she comes back to report (and thus reports in her own words, allowing her to forget details and-or intentionally change or embellish things) or we get concerned and send out a search party.

If players have the same goals to refrain from metagaming for the sake of RP then phantom rolls should not matter. Players would want to make in-character decisions regardless of player knowledge.

Which is much easier if player knowledge and character knowledge are kept as close to the same as possible.

Lan-"the goal might be to refrain from metagaming but if the opportunity isn't provided the temptation isn't there"-efan

 

[pemerton]

10-20 hours a.k.a 3-5 typical sessions. A trivial amount of time when held up against the many years the campaign is intended to last

How do yoiu know how long the campaign was meant to last - were you there? And how do you know what is a trivial waste of time? What make you think you can tell me how I should spend my leisure time?

Buty 20+ hours of gaming that in no small part derives from your personal elements of your character's nature

I have no idea what you mean by this.

As always that amorphic buzzzy buzz word "railroading" which basically means "what someone else does that i dont like." contextually practically everytime i see it used.

Seriously? The thread asked what DM flaw has caused me to leave a game.

I answered. Why would you expect me to point to things that I like by way of explanation? Are you another poster who thinks I have a moral duty to play with a bad GM whose game I don't enjoy?

if the player hitches his wagon to an NPC (let me spell it out Non-Player-Character) then they have given the GM license for that relationship to progress.

Says who?

 

[Hussar]

10-20 hours a.k.a 3-5 typical sessions. A trivial amount of time when held up against the many years the campaign is intended to last...
/snip

Lan-"the goal might be to refrain from metagaming but if the opportunity isn't provided the temptation isn't there"-efan

Are you meaning your personal campaigns, or do you mean that in a more general sense that everyone should have these multi-year campaigns? If it's just your own campaigns, that's fine, but, while I stand in awe of the length of your campaigns, I do honestly have zero interest in a campaign that is "many years".

 

[pemerton]

Are you meaning your personal campaigns, or do you mean that in a more general sense that everyone should have these multi-year campaigns? If it's just your own campaigns, that's fine, but, while I stand in awe of the length of your campaigns, I do honestly have zero interest in a campaign that is "many years".

I've got nothing against a long campaign. But that doesn't mean I want to waste 10-20 hours playing a boring railroad, when I could be playing something decent instead.

 

[TwoSix]

Are you meaning your personal campaigns, or do you mean that in a more general sense that everyone should have these multi-year campaigns? If it's just your own campaigns, that's fine, but, while I stand in awe of the length of your campaigns, I do honestly have zero interest in a campaign that is "many years".

Yep. Shadow of the Demon Lord is one of my favorite RPGs, and I think it has the right idea for campaign length. You start at level 0, you gain a level every session, and you end the campaign after 11 sessions, once you've hit level 10.

 

[S'mon]

Yep. Shadow of the Demon Lord is one of my favorite RPGs, and I think it has the right idea for campaign length. You start at level 0, you gain a level every session, and you end the campaign after 11 sessions, once you've hit level 10.

You crazy mixed-up kids.

My campaigns used to (ca 2000-2011) only last ca 30 sessions, but they never felt very satisfying. These days my main campaign (Wilderlands) has had many hundreds of sessions since January 2015 (I often do several a week), and is a far far richer experience than those limited session ones.

 

[iserith]

These days I like a campaign that has an endpoint in real time so we can work towards that as a group and finish on a high note. I don't want it to be like those TV series that go on forever until they just peter out.

 

[TwoSix]

You crazy mixed-up kids.

My campaigns used to (ca 2000-2011) only last ca 30 sessions, but they never felt very satisfying. These days my main campaign (Wilderlands) has had many hundreds of sessions since January 2015 (I often do several a week), and is a far far richer experience than those limited session ones.

I'm sure if you have the opportunity to play multiple times a week, you'll be much more amenable to longer campaigns.

Personally, I also prefer 8 episode limited series on Netflix to 15 season procedurals, and I'm always advocating for my favorite shows to just finish up already, so there's probably a personality aspect involved.