What way of playing D&D is completely incompatible with your way?

[Iosue]

Basically, I'm happy playing any kind of D&D. Railroads, dungeon crawls, it's all good. I don't like the concept of "dealbreakers". That said, I have two.

As a player, playing with highly optimized characters. I'm no good at it and I don't have the interest in it to get good at it, so it approaches anti-fun. I'm cool with random rolling and taking what the dice give me, and I enjoy doing some light customization around an idea. But I hate passing on interesting looking choices because they are underpowered, and I hate having to maximize my primary stat, when I'd like to maybe make an off the wall choice (Fighter with high intelligence! A hardy magic-user!). By no means am I saying "Handicapped players make for good role-playing", nor am I saying optimizers and power gamers can't role-play. Only that I hate playing the chargen mini-game. If I'm given an optimized pre-gen, cool. If I'm DMing, probably not a problem.

As a DM, games with no "Rule 0" or DM fiat. For me, as a DM, Rule 0 is as absolute as a Sith. As the name implies, to me it is even more fundamental to D&D than SDCIWC. I reserve the right to change or ignore any written rules in my game, and the NRA will support repealing the 2nd Amendment before I give it up. Ironically, as a DM I don't even use it that much. But I must have it to run a game.

 

[thedungeondelver]

Storygaming is a hateful, vile thing to me. Don't give me your manuscript for your unpublished DRAGONLANCE heartbreaker and tell me "this is what you're playing", because what you mean is "here's your script, welcome to the game."

So-called (nowadays) "System mastery". Where you're gaming the game, not playing the game. Knowing which exact A + B + < + ^ + ^ WIN THE GAME combo you need to build your character in to.

"Build optimization" type games. Concurrently, out-of-the-box super-heroes.

Games where there are no dungeons, where dragons are untouchable GAWDZ, games where detail points are handwaved.

 

[Kingreaper]

So-called (nowadays) "System mastery". Where you're gaming the game, not playing the game. Knowing which exact A + B + < + ^ + ^ WIN THE GAME combo you need to build your character in to.

It's ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → B A actually. Type it into character builder to unlock the extra hidden options.

 

[Mattachine]

I hate games where rules are allowed to intrude on otherwise fun and exciting scenarios.

I hate games that are players vs. DM.

 

[El Mahdi]

One True Way-ism.

I think it's possible to have different styles, goals, and motivations at one table, as long as everyone is tolerant of eachother and doesn't impose their beliefs on eachother. Those that partake of this exclusionary philosophy are not welcome at my table.

 

[WarlockLord]

Insisting that despite the fact your character sucks, you're a real roleplayer and not one of those "cheating munchkins", forcing to me carry your worthless sack of garbage through the campaign. "But I'm a chef! I contribute!" you cry as you're eaten by hydras.

Murdering the evil races "because they're evil." This doesn't go over very well with me.

Rules which throw out verisimilitude dubious balance principles

Piles of errata because a power needs to do 1 less point of damage.

Disciplines which all the NPCs can learn but you can't despite the fact you're supposedly a legendary mage.

Rolling for stats - enjoy your 1 16 and 5 10s while that wizard got an 18 and 2 16s.

Power-trip DMs.

People who insist that they really want to play (or DM), but are too lazy to learn the rules.

 

[Aeolius]

As long as the stakes are high, and there's conflict, for me it doesn't always have to be combat.

(You must spread some Experience Points around before giving it to Piratecat again.)

On the nosey!

 

[KarinsDad]

Did this actually happen? I mean, I've been in (and run) sessions where there was no combat but they were still fun. But you need some combat during the course of the game.

I once joined a group where the first two six hour sessions did not have any combat. I didn't come back a third time.

 

[Consonant Dude]

1. Playing with people I share nothing in common with

This is big for me. I know a lot of folks are willing to suffer through this but I'm not. I want to game with people I can do and share other things with, people who are part of my life in some other ways. I have zero interest in watching a stranger I am incompatible with pretend to be an elf on a weekly basis.

2. Complexity

I prefer a simpler form of DnD. I want to be able to prep campaigns easily and I want sessions that are action packed with actual playing time rather than endless computations, page-flipping and the like.

3. Miniatures

Sort of goes with #2 but I hate these things so much they deserve their own category.

4. Overdone intensity

Sure, I play with adults and we tackle some pretty nasty issues in our respective campaigns. But I don't want to replay Schindler's List, Irreversible or Hostel. I'm OK with harsh matters coming up every now and then but prefer if we fade out and imply. I don't like the GM, players or characters to just revel in misery or angst either.

5. Unequal spotlight

I like when everybody around the table has some fun during a session. That also includes the DM. It's an evening to entertain everybody to the best we can. If a character is taken out early? That happens, but I'm gonna make sure the player can either make a backup character right away or barring that possibility, let him or her run some monsters or do whatever he or she can to still feel involved. Not doing so is rude. If I invited a few people over and found out one of my guests was allergic, we wouldn't just sit there like numbnuts without fixing something for her. So why do it in a game?

 

[KarinsDad]

I prefer more middle of the road games.


I dislike a game where every player is expected to roleplay as if the player is an actor. Roleplaying is fun, but not to acting and LARP extremes.

In the same way, I'd just as soon not have a DM standing behind his screen, partially falling over when a bad guy drops, pontificating on what happens when an NPC takes a hit, etc. A little bit of hamming like this is ok, but some DMs think that they are Laurence Olivier playing MacBeth.

I'm not too keen on DMs hiding rolls behind their screen. Let what happens, happen and never fudge dice rolls.

In the same vein, I'm not keen on the DM assuming that it's his story and not a shared story by the entire table. Hence, the DM uses rule 0 excessively to change outcomes. Not just railroading, but an assumption that the DM knows best. Let the rules and random dice results mostly determine what happens, it sometimes leads to some very fun and unexpected (as opposed to scripted) situations. The DM is there to adjudicate, not to force feed a given story down the throats of the players. D&D isn't the place for the DM to tell his pulitzer prize story.

No Deus Ex Machina.

An unprepared DM or player.

Forcing players to play their PCs in certain ways. For example, assuming that just because the players are sitting at a table with PCs in a group, that all players are willing to play their PCs as helpful and cooperative with the other PCs all of the time. I actually like some amount of party conflict. It makes the PCs seem more real.

Adventures where the PCs cannot succeed unless a DNPC is along for the ride. I prefer adventures where the PCs shine, not the NPCs. Again, once in a while, it's ok (middle of the road), but not too often.

DMs who want PCs to explore every tiny detailed part of their world. I often play PCs that cut to the chase and blow off a lot of things to accomplish their goals. They miss stuff this way and might get in trouble because of it, but that's ok.

In this same vein, DMs that reiterate information and assert themselves into the party decision making. For example, the NPC Cleric tells the group about the mayor and the sewers. The PCs walk away, have a discussion, and decide to go check out the sewers, so the DM reminds everyone that the Cleric also talked about the mayor. hint, hint, wink, wink. Suddenly, half of the players want to go talk to the mayor. No. Let the players decide what they want to do and do not try to script the game. DMs have a lot of influence, so except for descriptions and NPCs interactions, the DMs should mostly keep their mouths shut when the players are deciding on a course of action unless the players ask for knowledge or memory rolls or some such.

Monsters that always fight to the death. In fact, monsters that fight to the death should be rare.


I do prefer campaigns where there is a certain amount of plausibility to them. The PCs come into town, they are treated like strangers, not like best friends. They are treated politely when it comes to commerce, but NPCs don't just come up and tell them secrets out of the blue. I don't like campaigns where the PCs are in the dark, but the NPCs seem to know a lot about the PCs. I don't like campaigns where the monsters surprise the PCs in combat, but these trained PCs never or almost never surprise the monsters. Or ones where the PCs are encounter magnets (the town is safe, until the PCs show up and suddenly, monsters are attacking in town right and left). If a town is being attacked by monsters, then the NPCs should have prepared defenses for this and the PCs should find out about it quickly upon arrival (why do you have catapults set up in the town square and makeshift walls around the town?).



Edit: I can't believe that I forgot about cross table talk. Although a certain amount is inevitable, I vastly prefer each player running his or her own PC without a group tactical discussion. If a player wants another player to do (or not do) certain things in combat, I'd prefer if that other player talked about it "in character". The concept of "No, no. Don't move there. I'm going to do a fireball on my next turn." grinds me. And I don't like more tactically capable or experienced players running roughshod over less capable players.

The same thing annoys me when players talk out of character in a roleplaying session. No, you do not get to discuss the situation without the NPCs hearing you. This is also a reason why I don't like the Telepathy of Kalashar (and the feats that boost it). It's an ability designed to get around roleplaying and make everything a group discussion "off stage".