D&D 5E Deal Breakers - Or woah, that is just too much

[Iry]

How about "Makes combat more interesting"?

Because I think the hand rules (and also the somatic/material rules) add to the strategy. You have to strategically decide who carries the torch. For me that clearly makes it more interesting.

In general? Sure. But we're not talking about in general. We're talking about a specific scenario where (I feel) the DM was too strict. The DM could have laughed it off and warned about the importance of paying attention to your hands in the future. Instead he took a hard line with the rules then and there, spent some of his goodwill, and gained nothing in return.

 

[Shasarak]

That's an orc paladin. I think he was referring to old 1e restrictions on class and race combinations that would preclude orc paladins, dwarven wizards, and dragonborn anything.

Yeah, I hated how the old 1e rules totally restricted Warforged even though they had not even been invented yet.

What were they thinking?

 

[Kalshane]

I have no problem with house rules, as long as they're declared ahead of time. (I'm separating spot-rulings from house rules, since the former are a response to things that come up in the moment and can't really be predicted.) If you're going to change the way a feat/spell/class ability works, you definitely need to let everyone know before they make a character that utilizes that game element. Back in the day we had binders containing house rules for a given game, though nowadays with Google Docs/Drop Box/whatever it's a lot easier to have centralized location for house rules/game world information/etc.

The only real deal-breakers for me are:

Evil PCs (unless the DM is running a "you're all evil" game and everyone signs onto it ahead of time) as I've yet to see them not be incredibly disruptive and I'm playing this game to be a hero, not to constantly deal with the fallout from Back McStabbins latest bout of jackholery.

PVP (I include indirect PVP, like stealing from fellow party members or setting them up to take the fall for something they didn't do, etc)

"Mature Content" that everyone playing hasn't consented to ahead of time. Whether it's ultra-violence/horror/rape/graphic sexual shenanigans/whatever, I don't want to sit at a table where players are uncomfortable with the subject matter, whether its myself or somebody else.

DMPCs. Sometimes there's a fine line between a DMPC and a helpful NPC, but the general deciding factor is how much of the spotlight the NPC takes up and how much choice the players have in having this character accompany them. Too much of the former and too little of the latter makes for a lot of bitterness.

Obvious favor being given to certain players/PCs. While I'm okay with the DM going easy on someone brand new to the game, a single PC shouldn't be showered in extra XP, magic items or special snowflake powers that are unavailable to the rest of the group because the player in question is a SO/Roommate/bribes the DM/whatever.

All that being said, outside of egregious offenses, I probably wouldn't immediately walk in any of these circumstances, but instead take the DM aside after the game (or send them an email) to express my concerns. If the DM has a satisfactory response, I'd continue to play. If not, then yes, I'll bow out of the game.

 

[Awesome Adam]

You mentioned Evil PCs and it made me smile.

One of our most successful campaigns ever was an ALL Evil campaign. We had pretty much established at the get go that since everyone was evil that if any one character got too far out of line that he would be quickly, and harshly, dealt with by the rest of the party.

In our campaigns where the PCs were all good, we could always count on someone playing Chaotic good, and making a nuisance of himself.

Our current campaign, running though OOTA, the party distribution is 2 good, 2 neutral, and 2 evil party members, and oddly enough it's the evil party members that lead and keep the party alive. Occasionally their methods are questioned, but their loyalty to the party and success record have kept the complaints to a minimum.

 

[Shasarak]

Looking back at the released schedule of 1e, I always thought that it was odd that the Monster Manual was released first without rules for Characters to fight them and the Players Handbook was released next without rules for rolling stats for Characters.

Obviously there was the pre-ADnD rules that were being used in the meantime but by the time that I started to play there was no sign of those proto rules.

 

[Fractal Rabbit]

I have few, if any, deal breakers and fall in with the "if the people I am playing with are fun,cool!" group.

That being said, I will most likely avoid even sitting at a table where the DM's boyfriend/girlfriend/wife/husband/whatever play as well. Last group I played in, the DM's girlfriend magically landed every killing blow on every major monster/boss. Every single time! It was like magic. Those old Chick Tracts were right! Dungeons and Dragons does cause magical effects in the real world!

Seriously. If you DM and your significant other plays in that game, take a long, hard look at how you treat that player in relation to other players.

Does your SO's PC:

- rarely if ever get knocked down?

-always land the killing blow?

-get favorable treatment from opposite gender NPC's regardless of CHA score?

Do YOU the DM feel like if you don't deliver these conditions, you will face repercussions?

If you answered yes to at least one of these questions, you might be annoying the heck out of your other players.

 

[Azurewraith]

I have few, if any, deal breakers and fall in with the "if the people I am playing with are fun,cool!" group.

That being said, I will most likely avoid even sitting at a table where the DM's boyfriend/girlfriend/wife/husband/whatever play as well. Last group I played in, the DM's girlfriend magically landed every killing blow on every major monster/boss. Every single time! It was like magic. Those old Chick Tracts were right! Dungeons and Dragons does cause magical effects in the real world!

Seriously. If you DM and your significant other plays in that game, take a long, hard look at how you treat that player in relation to other players.

Does your SO's PC:

- rarely if ever get knocked down?

-always land the killing blow?

-get favorable treatment from opposite gender NPC's regardless of CHA score?

Do YOU the DM feel like if you don't deliver these conditions, you will face repercussions?

If you answered yes to at least one of these questions, you might be annoying the heck out of your other players.

I dm for my wife... she still hasn't forgiven me for the time I killed wolf in 3.5 *sigh* some times I think I go to much the other way and end up penalizing her.

 

[Fractal Rabbit]

Azurewraith,

I love my wife dearly. No, really, I do. And part of me would love to game with her, if only to have an activity we both enjoy. But playing at tables with SOPCs (my new term: Significant Othe Player Character) has left such a bad taste in my mouth that I don't want to subject my friends (and they are friends, not just people I play with) to the obnoxious crap that drove me from other tables.

In my experience, you are in the minority.

 

[Azurewraith]

Azurewraith,

I love my wife dearly. No, really, I do. And part of me would love to game with her, if only to have an activity we both enjoy. But playing at tables with SOPCs (my new term: Significant Othe Player Character) has left such a bad taste in my mouth that I don't want to subject my friends (and they are friends, not just people I play with) to the obnoxious crap that drove me from other tables.

In my experience, you are in the minority.

I totally understand if it were any other table i would of had reservations but were the couples table lol all loved up until the dice hit the grid.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Azurewraith,

I love my wife dearly. No, really, I do. And part of me would love to game with her, if only to have an activity we both enjoy. But playing at tables with SOPCs (my new term: Significant Othe Player Character) has left such a bad taste in my mouth that I don't want to subject my friends (and they are friends, not just people I play with) to the obnoxious crap that drove me from other tables.

In my experience, you are in the minority.

Not in mine, though. Not only does my wife game with us, but in the various gaming groups I have or had over the years, I've played in games run by one half of four separate married couples. In none of those cases--myself included--did the DM play favorites with his/her spouse. (And my wife would be pissed at me if I did.) Rarely was there any special treatment at all, and when there was a noticeable difference, it was 1) slight, and 2) in the other direction; that is, the DM was too hard on the spouse, in order to avoid even the appearance of favoritism.

The problem isn't married couples in game. It's immature DMs.