What are the no-goes for you?

[Harlekin]

One more thing

I agree with many things I heard so far, so I'll just add one more thing:

Racist or homophobic jokes are a quick way to get booted from my game or to make me leave. Calling events or things "gay' if you mean that they suck included.

However that may fall under the "do not play with jerks" rule.

 

[thedungeondelver]

If you set parameters up front, the players should be respectful of that (after all, you are doing all the work to prep and run the game). But I think this needs to be balanced with "let the players play the characters they really want to play." Too many restrictions (or worse, announcing them after I've created my character) is a real turn-off for me.

Within the parameters of the campaign? Sure, absolutely. If I'm playing AD&D, I can guarantee you it's set in GREYHAWK so someone saying "I've got the stats, I'm going to play a paladin." is A-OK.

Conversely? Someone in the same campaign trying to force a Tiefling on me? Yeah, no not gonna work.

Goes back to the TWLIGHT:2000 game I was talking about - I said: driver, gunner, medic, vehicle commander*, highest ranks are E4. Suddenly I had a SpecOps sniper and a major.

If I'd said "it's open season on character creation, irrespective of rank and MOS", then...well, a major and a SpecOps guy would've been just hunky-dory.

No respect for me or my game, honestly (the game went well in spite of the two "exceptions").

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Within the parameters of the campaign? Sure, absolutely. If I'm playing AD&D, I can guarantee you it's set in GREYHAWK so someone saying "I've got the stats, I'm going to play a paladin." is A-OK.

Conversely? Someone in the same campaign trying to force a Tiefling on me? Yeah, no not gonna work.

"Force" sounds disruptive. What if I asked if I could play the bastard offspring of a Furyondian peasant woman and a scion of Iuz? And I wished to use the tiefling stats to accomplish this? (Assume I also have a more fleshed-out backstory to accompany the character.)

Goes back to the TWLIGHT:2000 game I was talking about - I said: driver, gunner, medic, vehicle commander*, highest ranks are E4. Suddenly I had a SpecOps sniper and a major.

Is this normal for Twilight:2000? It seems to me like telling a D&D group "I need you to make a fighter, wizard, rogue and a cleric." That sounds too restrictive for my tastes. Unless it was a one-shot, then you could make the character for me for all I care.

 

[Bumbles]

I'm glad I'm not the only one with no-goes.

Not by a long shot!

I get where Bumbles is coming from. There is nothing more uncomfortable than being in a game with two people in a deteriorating romantic relationship; often no matter how mature they try to be about it the tension is palpable. That being said I've also gamed with enough stable couples to not leave games with SO's out of hand.

Yeah, I guess I should have clarified my original post in the first place. Oh well, I'll make sure to be clearer if it ever comes up again. Learned from the experience.

 

[Bumbles]

No respect for me or my game, honestly (the game went well in spite of the two "exceptions").

That's why I put my character creation rules in writing. And try to have some pre-gens around.

 

[outsider]

Player no-goes:
PvP killing.
PvP theft.
PvP mind control.
Characters that have no reason to be with the group.
Characters that have no reason to go on adventures.
Characters that are deliberately useless to the group.
Cheating.

DM no-goes:
Powertripping.
Railroading.
House rules.
Forcing unwanted changes on PCs.
Cheating.

Social no-goes:
Sexism.
Racism.
Drug use(including cigarettes and alcohol).
Disrespecting the hosting location or any of it's residents/proprietors.

 

[billd91]

DM no-goes:
Forcing unwanted changes on PCs.

Does this include death by hit point loss or any other unfavorable consequences?

I'm only asking because that's phrased so broadly, I'm not sure what you mean.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Including one case where one person slept around with several persons involved in the group. Not good. (And no, I wasn't involved myself, I was just at the table and didn't want any part of it.)

Several? Sounds like you missed out on some action there.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Does this include death by hit point loss or any other unfavorable consequences?

I'm only asking because that's phrased so broadly, I'm not sure what you mean.

If I understand properly, what he's talking about is something similar to what happened to my wife in a game many years ago that soured us on the entire campaign.

She had come up with a character, including a semi-detailed backstory, which the DM had approved. And yet, when she joined the campaign (a few games into it), he all of a sudden stuck her with amnesia, and then revealed that she was actually the heir to a particular kingdom.

In other words, he accepted her character, background and all, and then immediately rewrote it into a different character.

And yes, that's something I should have added to my own no-goes. I have no problem with the DM adding twists and surprises to my character's background, but completely rewriting it? Um, no.

 

[Wicht]

My no goes would include: drinking or drug use, smoking in house, excessive foul language, excessive crudity, regular temper tantrums.