D&D 5E (2014) I quit a game. Am I in the wrong? (spoiler, I don't believe so)

[AnotherGuy]

This table ain't playing much of anything anymore because of it too.

By my count there is still one play group active.

 

[Vaalingrade]

This thread makes me think we need a dnd AITA forum

"My finace cheated on me with my mother and when he tried to stab me, I resisted and survived, AITA?"

"I killed a man in front of his family because he sort of looked like a guy who owed me $20. AITA?"

Nothing in between.

 

[R_J_K75]

Mostly because I find this a great opportunity to do something with that absence. Sometimes, there's nothing one can do. But other times it can be great fun spending 20-30 minutes finding out why the party Druid was off on his own for a day.

I'd agree if the player was absent for an extended period of time, say for a few months but for one session I don't think it's worth the bother considering that one session is usually a very short period of in game time. I suppose it all depends on exactly what occurred while the player was gone for that one session. IME its very rare that a campaign skips ahead to far in the future all at once.

 

[Steampunkette]

Doesn't matter what it is or why. You can -always- walk away.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Doesn't matter what it is or why. You can -always- walk away.

Well, to quote the greatest roaster of chickens, Sir Kenny of Rogers-

You gotta know when to walk away, and know when to RUN.

 

[pemerton]

do you believe I am in the wrong?

No. You're not under any obligation to play in this game.

 

[dave2008]

D&D is supposed to be fun. If it's not fun, then you need to do something else.

That said, and as others have mentioned, this is like most things at the table. What we have here, is a failure to communicate.

The DM should not have done this. However, you probably could have avoided this outcome if you had more clearly communicated your strong feelings to the DM earlier in the process. When you let a problem fester, the DM doesn't realize how much of a problem it is for you, and then it becomes a much bigger problem.

We all assume that people know what we are thinking. They don't.

Always love a good "Cool Hand Luke" reference.

 

[Redwizard007]

I should have saw the red flag when our first Level 1 adventure was facing a nest of Troglodytes, which each have multi attack of 3, and a stench you need to save from. That was a tough nest, but we did beat it.

Correct, and they have 3 attacks. So 4 of them should be good for a party of 4. But, that is 12 attacks a round vs 4 attacks a round.

They were chosen because they had multiple attacks. Like, what is the scummiest creature I can conjure up for level 1 and have you fight groups of?

I was going to defend the trog encounter, because i thought you were over reacting, but this would actually be pretty tough for a fully rested level 1 party with no AoE or control spells. (attacks at +4, doing 1d4+2 damage on a hit, and having 13HP with an 11AC.)

12 attacks with roughly 40% chance to hit (+4 vs 16AC) is an average of 22.68 damage per round. That assumes they go high enough in initiative to all attack before they die. If they are all top of the order, they probably deal 34 damage total in the encounter if subjected to basic attacks. That's a lot more than I expected. Note: spells, class abilities and feats could reduce that dramatically.

The DC12 Con save is probably a 50% save for most PCs, but more like 55% for anyone likely to be in its range. That means probably 2 PCs exposed and 1 successfully poisoned. A melee character with disadvantage to attacks due to poison usually stinks, but in this encounter its actually not a big deal.

Their defenses are garbage. AC11 means they are being hit 75% of the time, and with 13HP that is probably 2 hits to drop each one. With saves ranging from -2 to +2, they also fall easily to control spells and AOEs that end the encounter in basically 1 round with 65% success rates or better on anything that doesn't target their best saves.

For a party that has access to Burning Hands, Color Spray, Entangle, Grease, Ice Knife, Sleep, Tasha's Caustic Brew, or Thunderwave, this is a pretty good encounter. For a party of fighters and rogues, it will probably end with 1-2 unconscious PCs.

Regardless, I would have left after the first time they said, "oh, sorry. Your PC wandered off with this other group."

 

[pemerton]

Given that many scenarios are DM created I'm not sure I'm fully understanding your gripe in this particular instance. Were rolls not made by the DM or the other players on behalf of your PC? Is it your contention a PC whose player is not present is immune to affects?

I took the point to be that the GM has created a scenario, has adjudicated that scenario, and then is presenting the outcome of that scenario as if it were an "objective" reason why @Slit518 is not able to play their second PC.

 

[Slit518]

I took the point to be that the GM has created a scenario, has adjudicated that scenario, and then is presenting the outcome of that scenario as if it were an "objective" reason why @Slit518 is not able to play their second PC.

You are correct.