D&D General I need a D&D counseling session! Help! (Re: Update ("Argument-Stopping Protocols" -- please advise!))

[Droop-in-soup]

Welcome to another old fart who is out shape also.
1. If the DM wants to run as written, let them. When I started running again in 2016 that what I did. Now days I let some stuff ride.
2. "My wife is not thrilled that I do it at all," This a major problem especially as game is at your house. No comment.
3. If you have time to read the net on builds, you have time to read the PHB.
4. Rebuilding your pc by swapping out cantrips etc. I have no problem with this. BUT TELL ME FIRST and do between sessions.
5. No adjustments to feats, etc. See 1.
6. My players love me when I roll low initiative and low hits. They hate me when I roll 4 20s in roll. BUT Griping about it has become an issue with your DM. Stop it. Me and some other gamers got verbally slap from a player by ragging on a mistake they made 6 months ago with a different PC. It was funny until they got tired of the ragging. The DM is tired of the ragging.
7. Death sucks. So does gripping about it. Skully two has over 80 names on him. My players know I will kill them. But I will not go out the way to do so. However I do Adventure League (AL) and Season 9 is in hell. I have told every one most of the monsters will be evil. But if I was homebrewing, after a death I do allow the player to build a new pc of the same level they lost.
8. Swapping out magic in modules to support pcs. If was homebrewing, and the player was not a problem, I would do so. I quit in 2000 trying to bribe people with magic to behave.
9. Traps. Build your pc with a high passive score. In AL that finds most traps.
10. Wall of text need paragraph breaks just to break up the wall.

Thank you. You are a sharp person. You got me on reading the PHB, time wise. It is a matter of also finding the drive to do it. But I like your responses.

Could you please say more about #8: what do you mean, bribe people with magic to behave?

Oh yeah, and what do you mean by paragraph breaks? I learned how to use BB code to remake my wall into a sane post using multi-tier spoilers. Is that what you mean, or did I miss another method? How does my post look now? Any advice?

 

[Droop-in-soup]

I have found that, in my experience, it is far more productive to introduce new experimental ideas into my own game than to try to convince another DM to try it. And I get it, you would like him to implement these ideas because you feel that it will improve your own experience. However, while you can inform him of a cool idea that you've heard about, you shouldn't pressure him. If he doesn't like the idea and you do, try it in your own game first. This has the additional benefit that you each get to experience it from the other side of the screen. You as a DM and he as a player. After doing so, you might find that it wasn't such a good idea at all. Or he might see that it's not the issue he anticipated it would be.

For example, you mentioned that you see no reason that Magic Stone and Magic Stick cantrips don't scale. Consider that they do in fact scale with number of attacks. Additionally, unlike other cantrips, these allow you to add your ability score modifier to damage. If you allow them to scale, then they would be arguably overpowered in the hands of any character that can make extra attacks. Certainly far more powerful than any cantrip is intended to be. You can't just balance a rule for the standard use case. You have to look for obvious ways it could be unbalanced in non-standard cases. For example, a monk with the magic initiate feat would be obscenely powerful under this proposed buff.

The Dungeon Dudes have some interesting ideas. But they don't need to run the campaign that arises from those ideas. They don't need to deal with the fallout if the proposal proves overpowered or otherwise problematic. If you convince your friend to implement the idea in his game, then he does. If you implement the idea in your game then it is your problem. If he is reticent to try something unproven, then the right thing is either to drop it politely or be the test subject by adding it to your own campaign.

This was very helpful to me, about the spells, thank you. I had forgotten about the modifiers to damage. I missed that. It shifts the bar a bit. I wonder why the writer of the Guide wrote them off so quickly, if you see these spells as still buff?

On experimental ideas: I know, I am a bit stuck in my situation. I want to experience certain things as a player, and certain other things as a DM. It is disappointing to imagine my only option in this situation is to be a DM with creative license, and not also as a player. Disappointment aside, a lot of aggravation would have been avoided if I let it go, as you wisely advise.

 

[Droop-in-soup]

Thanks for sharing your view of things and putting so much thought and effort into posting them.

From a long-distance and completely neutral viewpoint, while I don't entirely agree with all your views and ideas I can at least see the rationale behind most of them. There's only one real place where on a philosophical basis I'd dig in my heels a bit, and it's with this:
While your DM's choice of phrasing here is - to say the least - far from diplomatic, the underlying principle behind it is solid as a rock.

I'm a firm believer in the idea of the game world being static with regards to not morphing itself to suit the particular PCs that the players happen to have rolled up.

Thus, to follow your example, if the PCs use rapier, dagger, crossbow and hammer and the adventure wants to give them a +1 longsword then a +1 longsword is exactly what they'll get; and its on them to either find a way to make use of it or to stow it away and sell it once back in town.

If my PC specializes in an exotic weapon (say, glaive-guisarme) then I-as-player have to accept in my meta-thinking that the odds of my ever finding a magic one in the wild are going to be vastly lower than if I'd gone with a more common weapon. Well, so be it. When's the last time you ever found a magic glaive-guisarme in any adventure, published or homebrew?

Yeah, I didn't think so.

And while I posit that it's on the DM (any DM) to provide mechanisms by which magic items can be commissioned*, it's not on the DM in any way to plant magic glaive-guisarmes in places where they otherwise wouldn't be just because my PC happens to use them.

* - where you pay an artificer who then takes a considerable time - months at least - to construct and enchant the item you paid for.

The one exception to this would be instances where the party are given customized rewards - usually divinely - for accomplishing a mission of some sort, or before setting out on one, an example being Galadhriel's gifts to the Fellowship on departing Lothlorien. Here the DM really should be tailoring the reward/gift to what the PC either most wants or most needs.

You make a sound argument. There is merit to your position. Myself, following your logic, I would prefer to make easy change where it makes sense, long sword to short, or to dagger, etc. Whenever I look further at this 'problem' I find then I'd need to create a mechanic to sell, trade, buy, create magic items. That seems like another skill set for me as a DM. So, in a way, I see that what I suggest is a shortcut to change a module created by another person to suit the style and needs I see in the players at the table; one thing for people who wish for lots of magic, something else for others. My friend is more your style, for sure.

As a player, my druid wanting non-metal armor brought a similar problem to me. There was no easy way with my friend to work with that, so I just passed on it. It was never pressing. But I have read interesting solutions for druid armor. It seems it thrives more in a homebrew environment.

And hey, I think there just aren't enough magic glaive-guisarmes in the world. Perhaps with a few more Pole-Arm Masters around the demand would rise and we would see them around! Where is that artificer when I need one?

Regardless of my personal preferences to the above, I really enjoyed your train of thought and way with it. Clear and worthy.

 

[Charlaquin]

@Droop-in-soup: I get the impression that what you’re looking for in D&D would be much better satisfied by DMing than by playing. As you say, you’re not in a place in your life where you can just play a game to have fun; you are seeking a greater enrichment from it, and in particular you are looking to experience game design. I think a big part of the tension you are experiencing is coming from the fact that you are trying to remain a player, when the way you really seem to want to engage with the game is as a DM. As a result, you are feeling too constrained by the player’s role, and your friend is feeling like you’re stepping on his toes. It’s not leading to an experience that is satisfying or enjoyable for either of you, and I think the best solution at this point would be for you not to play D&D together, at least until you can sort out what you both want and need out of the game and whether or not both can be satisfied by the same game.

Now, I understand that you have limited time to devote to gaming, so it may not be possible for you to DM a game, but if you can find the time, it seems to me like you would find that much more rewarding, and more fun. The ways you describe yourself engaging with the game - researching rules interpretations online, developing house rules to address problems you perceive with the rules as written, thinking about things like traps and magic item distribution and how to tweak them to make the best experience for the players, and just generally treating D&D as a creative endeavor rather than “just” a fun game? These are all ways a DM typically engages with the game, not the ways a player typically does (and players doing these things are often seen as engaging in “back-seat DMing,” which is generally considered poor form.) If that’s what you enjoy in D&D, I think you would enjoy DMing a great deal.

Lastly, if your wife doesn’t like that you play D&D... That’s a problem that needs to be dealt with. I can’t tell you what solution is right for you, but it’s not healthy to have one partner regularly participating in a hobby and the other partner resenting them for doing so. Sounds like you already see a councilor, which is great, I might recommend talking to them about D&D as well (if you haven’t already).

 

[billd91]

But the pictures. He expressed a lot of hurt over my reaction to the pictures. That is unfortunate. This is how it is from my side. Our campaigns included a number of characters. For myself, I did not go too deeply into exactly how my characters look, but rather live into them in a vague and unique way that lives inside. One day when I was shown some iteration of the campaign log, suddenly I had pictures for my characters and his characters. From my experience, to put a description to it, it was jarring and abstract in a bad way, there was NO relation at all to my inner experience. So, I'm sorry that I created another bummer experience for my friend. That wasn't intended. But I can't be forced to get excited about something that was distinctly unwanted.

Maybe you can't be forced to be excited, but you still read like you're being kind of a dick about it. Maybe he's overreacting a bit too, but "jarring and abstract in a bad way"? Really?!? The art your friend picked may not fit your conception of your character, but then find some that does. Find the time to find something that will suffice even if it's not perfect - it will help you communicate if nothing else.

 

[jasper]

Thank you. You are a sharp person. You got me on reading the PHB, time wise. It is a matter of also finding the drive to do it. But I like your responses.

Could you please say more about #8: what do you mean, bribe people with magic to behave?

Oh yeah, and what do you mean by paragraph breaks? I learned how to use BB code to remake my wall into a sane post using multi-tier spoilers. Is that what you mean, or did I miss another method? How does my post look now? Any advice?

This post looks find. In wall of text post, when I create a new paragraph about every 4 lines of text. The original post is fine now. I am old fart and have to set the display at 125% or my eyes get tired.

Bribing people with magic items. I use to have some problem players who either pouted when they did not get a magic item in a session. Or even when I seeded the adventure to match their wish list, their bad behavior still happen. Some I talked to some and the behavior lessen. Another I bounced from the table but not the house. I would play with him with my pc but if I dm; he would have play cards, or watch tv with the other non gamers.

With my stay at home orders. I have finish reading the DMG cover to cover. It was boring in parts and took a week. Xanathar's is my next read through. That and what ever the wife has on the honey do list. Hey I am 6 weekends ahead on the list right now.

I am currently running Adventure League. The main two rules are RAW with some errata but Crawford tweets are DM's decision. Second play nice with others. I do have some minor problem players. Most of them are due to them having special needs which sooner or later get on other gamers nerves. Two gamers we only allow to play together when there is only one table. And I an other players smack both down both players when they get on each other nerves or ours.

 

[Fanaelialae]

This was very helpful to me, about the spells, thank you. I had forgotten about the modifiers to damage. I missed that. It shifts the bar a bit. I wonder why the writer of the Guide wrote them off so quickly, if you see these spells as still buff?

Because class guides are generally written from the perspective of that class (that's what I'm assuming you mean by guide). Shillelagh and Magic Stone aren't that great for a druid (by which I mean there are better options amongst the cantrips). Although I did have a high level druid in one campaign who used a Staff of the Viper in conjunction with Shillelagh when he was forced into melee. It was reasonably effective.

As written, they're also decent but not amazing for non-druids. However, were you to buff them by scaling as cantrips normally do, they'd be OP in the hands of a non-druid. Imagine an 11th level fighter making 3 attacks with Shillelagh for 3d8+mod damage. Now imagine that their Shillelagh is a Staff of Striking! It would be completely over the top.

FWIW, if I were to do anything with Shillelagh it would be to have it grant Extra Attack at 11th level. This buffs the druid without buffing the fighter. Even here, however, you need to be somewhat careful as there might be some unreasonable combination out there that could exploit this. Ultimately, I don't think Shillelagh is so weak that it really requires a buff. Some options will always be on the lower end of the scale. 5e is pretty good about ensuring that no options are unviable.

On experimental ideas: I know, I am a bit stuck in my situation. I want to experience certain things as a player, and certain other things as a DM. It is disappointing to imagine my only option in this situation is to be a DM with creative license, and not also as a player. Disappointment aside, a lot of aggravation would have been avoided if I let it go, as you wisely advise.

By using my own campaign as a test bed, over the years I have actually convinced the fellow DMs at my table to incorporate some of my ideas (which they balked at when I first proposed them in conversation).

Of course, some of those ideas were complete disasters and caused the campaigns I tested them in to do their best Hindenburg impression. Others worked fine in my games but my fellow DMs chose not to incorporate into their own.

The point is that if you use your own campaign as the testing ground, then your friend may like some of the ideas and might then use them in his own campaigns, meaning that you would then get to experience them. It's only a maybe, but it's something.

 

[billd91]

I'm going to echo and comment on some of these responses to Droop-in-soup since Jasper summarizes them so well.

1. If the DM wants to run as written, let them. When I started running again in 2016 that what I did. Now days I let some stuff ride.

Agreeing to play a game by the rules as they're written for six months (or even longer) isn't really a bad agreement. You have to start somewhere and it often works better to learn a game as it was written and become familiar with it before going off the rails with modifications. Turns out the game works pretty well if you sit back and let it be what it is.

2. "My wife is not thrilled that I do it at all," This a major problem especially as game is at your house. No comment.

Yeah, this can be a tricky thing. Does she not like it because of its affect on your emotional state? Because people are tramping through the house? Because it takes up time? Because it takes you (but not her) away from the 50/50 parenting? There are remedies to each of these things but that's something between you and her.

6. My players love me when I roll low initiative and low hits. They hate me when I roll 4 20s in roll. BUT Griping about it has become an issue with your DM. Stop it. Me and some other gamers got verbally slap from a player by ragging on a mistake they made 6 months ago with a different PC. It was funny until they got tired of the ragging. The DM is tired of the ragging.
7. Death sucks. So does gripping about it. Skully two has over 80 names on him. My players know I will kill them. But I will not go out the way to do so. However I do Adventure League (AL) and Season 9 is in hell. I have told every one most of the monsters will be evil. But if I was homebrewing, after a death I do allow the player to build a new pc of the same level they lost.

The important thing here is it's a game. It's not out to get you. Weird things happen because dice are random number generators. That's part of the challenge - playing to defeat the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune as well as have fun interactions with the other characters. And yes, luck can turn on you. The full consequences of a game can be determined but it has to be with the agreement of the full table. If the other players are OK with their PCs dying and you're the only one opposed, you either need to accept their decision or find a new group to play with. Complaining and griping won't get you there. You need to model good and gracious behavior for your 5 year old. And then maybe your DM friend doesn't have to ask for stifling group guidelines.

Part of the issue here is it sounds like you think creating a new character requires a ton of investment - it doesn't have to. You can invest a lot if you want, but if you don't have the time, then don't. Find some creative shortcuts, model characters on ones that you've encountered in other media like books and movies, throw a few ideas in a hat or roll for them and see what you get - then run with them. This doesn't have to be deadly serious, carefully crafted as a tome-like novel like War and Peace. Bubblegum pop and pulp can be just as fun.

9. Traps. Build your pc with a high passive score. In AL that finds most traps.

I kind of understand the whole traps thing. Stylistically, they work for some people (and are genre appropriate) but they can also really irritate because they really slow things down, particularly for paranoid players. Like character death consequences, this is a style thing. If the other players are OK with them, you should align to their preferences. But if you find they agree with you, then Dungeonosophy should relent on them recognizing that his players just find them boring.

 

[Charlaquin]

Maybe you can't be forced to be excited, but you still read like you're being kind of a dick about it. Maybe he's overreacting a bit too, but "jarring and abstract in a bad way"? Really?!? The art your friend picked may not fit your conception of your character, but then find some that does. Find the time to find something that will suffice even if it's not perfect - it will help you communicate if nothing else.

This may be a bit of a tangent, but I think it’s worth bringing up - “finding art” to represent your character is... kind of an iffy practice. If you want art to represent your character, I recommend either making it yourself or commissioning it from an artist whose style suits your taste. Repurposing art that was made for something else to represent your character not only forces you into a position of having to compromise on your vision of the character, it’s also generally considered theft among artists. You’re benefiting from the artist’s labor without providing any wages for said labor, which they may rely on to make a living, and at the same time misrepresenting their work as a depiction of your own character instead of the character it was created to depict.

It’s one of those offenses, like piracy of digital content, that is generally considered socially acceptable because “everyone does it,” but if nothing else it is really disrespectful to the artist whose work you “found” and used to represent your character.

 

[Lanefan]

This may be a bit of a tangent, but I think it’s worth bringing up - “finding art” to represent your character is... kind of an iffy practice. If you want art to represent your character, I recommend either making it yourself or commissioning it from an artist whose style suits your taste.

Make it myself?

If I did that I'd have run a collection of nigh-identical stick figures over the past almost-40-years.

Commission the art? I'm not sure any artist would want me as a customer. I know in my head what I want the character to look like but I'd be crap at describing it as I only know what's right when I see it, meaning the artist would probably end up doing gobs of pictures before finally getting it right when expecting to only do one. That, and there's the question of affordability...