D&D 5E Bad Wrong Fun

[MNblockhead]

People can take umbrage, sure, but "Every single human everywhere hates those dragon-looking people who have racial stats for being paladins, but oh boy love them those small humans" has always been a dumb take and makes me go closer to the "I'm just gonna make an elven town who kill humans on sight for these exact reasons" side of things

I've made elven towns that do this. Well, that is if you make it through the forest and find the town.

 

[TarionzCousin]

I used to know someone who encouraged PVP in all campaigns he ran. None of those campaigns ever finished--all ended with multiple players quitting. Coincidence?

 

[Campbell]

I disagree to a point. Some people are shy, have other commitments that sometimes are more important than an RPG and their concentration isnt always there, or some people play purely for the social interaction than the game itself. Ive never had a player just sit there and be completely passive, some people are just better at playing the game than others. Now if someone is truly not participating at all then yeah they probably shouldnt be there.

I get it. I really do. I am not saying these people should not play roleplaying games. Just that playing at the same table with passive players is not fun for me. For me it feels a little like dating someone who is not as into you as you are into them. Best to move on to people who are.

I am looking to bring a certain level interest, energy, excitement, and effort to play (on both sides of the screen). For that to feel personally rewarding to me I need to play with other people who bring it. I enjoy deeply collaborative play (creatively and on a game play level). For that to work I need collaborative partners.

If someone needs to come out of their shell or gain confidence I will gladly work with them on either side of the screen. If they have no interest in the sort of play I am personally looking for we can go our separate ways.

 

[R_J_K75]

I get it. I really do. I am not saying these people should not play roleplaying games. Just that playing at the same table with passive players is not fun for me. For me it feels a little like dating someone who is not as into you as you are into them. Best to move on to people who are.

I am looking to bring a certain level interest, energy, excitement, and effort to play (on both sides of the screen). For that to feel personally rewarding to me I need to play with other people who bring it. I enjoy deeply collaborative play (creatively and on a game play level). For that to work I need collaborative partners.

If someone needs to come out of their shell or gain confidence I will gladly work with them on either side of the screen. If they have no interest in the sort of play I am personally looking for we can go our separate ways.

Fair enough. If thats the type of game and people you want you are certainly entitled to it.

 

[Manbearcat]

A player who has become completely thematically passive (in terms of advocating for their character's interests) because they've been dealing with a decade or longer regime of GM Force, opaque resolution, metaplot imposition, and the creative energy that overwhelmingly propels play being damn near the exclusive domain of the GM or a module.

Its not that I blame the player in the moment. I understand. But I resent their past GM(s) for stunting their ability to advocate strongly for their character and proactively propel play through their imagination and mental horsepower (but I suppose I'm thankful for the opportunity to help them chart another course if they're so inclined).

 

[Lanefan]

How did the DM even let this character in the game. I agree with your initial reaction to the half-dragon. Sounds like complete nonsense.

Half-Dragons were an official option at the time, I suppose (though might have come from 3.5, it has been released by the time this character came in, and the DM was en route to an on-the-fly system changeover from 3.0 to 3.5). It was being run relatively by-the-book.

 

[Lanefan]

I find D&D to be inherently silly. Trying to be serious just makes it funnier to me. Our characters are almost always engaged in Very Serious Business, but find a way to make it hilarious.

Agreed.

If you can't laugh at it, laugh with it. And if you ain't laughing, you ain't living.

 

[Burnside]

This Grognard thinks you young whippersnappers need to buy and play an adventure module - it's like being able to find a single chapter from a published AP.
Pbbbbbt !

Oh, I am also old.

 

[jasper]

***

- The word "module". It's a non-fun word to begin with; one that makes me feel like I'm about to complete a classroom exercise rather than go on an adventure. Also, it hasn't been used officially for any product since 1999. Twenty years. If you use it, I know you're an OLD MAN. OLD!

Shut kid. I have dice older that you. OLD. THAT IS OLD FART TO YOU! Module is better that "adventure path". is going to be a garden path? path of delights? Path way to Hell? (the song got wrong). And another everything you mention but the last was present back in 1E. Where we had to colour in our d20 two different colours because they went 0-9 twice. We didn't have d20s who opposite sides add up to 21. We were lucky if the 10 and 20 were opposite. My friend Gary (not that Gary) had to start with CARDBOARD CHITS for dice. NONE of THIS LAME BEEEP Cardboard you get today. Cardboard you could jack up your Model T.
and...... ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

 

[jasper]

B...

Remember, the DM is an actual person who is also trying to enjoy the game. It's a tough job, and it takes a lot of creativity and time. "Let the players have whatever they want" is the most unreasonable request for most of us.

Marry me! I topped you.... oppps just reread the line. I know I got edit the line. No one will know.