TarionzCousin
Second Most Angelic Devil Ever
I can't game in a large loud room (like at some conventions or game stores) where I have to yell to be heard.
Does that count?
Does that count?
What way of playing D&D is completely incompatible with your way?
- Thread starter Libramarian
- Start date
Yes, annoyances and interruptions count. I don't like stores where a player is a store employee and has to help customers, or when players go outside for a cigarette break, or when players bring disruptive or attention seeking children to a game.
KidSnide
Adventurer
I don't like games where everything is exactly as it seems. I need a game to have sort of discovery, mystery, exploration or new type of character interaction. In short, something interesting needs to be going on for the PCs to interact with.
I like the challenge of playing a character effectively, but that alone isn't enough for me to enjoy spending time to play D&D.
-KS
I like the challenge of playing a character effectively, but that alone isn't enough for me to enjoy spending time to play D&D.
-KS
Here is my list.
Metagaming. I know it is hard but your character is first level and has never heard of a troll so why do automatically know tat you need fire. Playing with seasoned players can be difficult because they have years of experience and some don't even try to stop it from seeping into their character.
Vanilla style games. I like a little gray in my world so I prefer if not everything is evil that you have to deal with. That sometimes you are faced with making a hard choice.
Modern ethics in a fantasy world. This is a huge one for me. Most fantasy worlds are not the USA of the 21 century with equal rights, Miranda laws, Geneva conventions and so on.
Lonewolf characters. They just don't work at a table with other players and makes my job as the DM harder.
Rouges who steal all the time. I have rouges to be the most disruptive class at the table. They steal from the people helping to keep them alive. Even when they have gold they prefer to take a chance stealing from the shops. And they get angry when the party has had enough and leaves them to their fate.
Character Equality. I hate point buy it makes boring characters. I have in my 30 so years of playing never seen an issue with not having fun or being marginalized because someone else had better stats.
PC Plot Protection. The game revolves around the PC but the world does not. PCs should not be treated like special snowflakes. I don't care how powerful you are mouthing off to the king of the land is a bad idea and there will always be bigger fish.
High Level PCs acting like tyrants. I hate the attitude well we are 15 level the town guard is only 3 so they can't hurt us. Which is why I often level the world along with the PCs.
Metagaming. I know it is hard but your character is first level and has never heard of a troll so why do automatically know tat you need fire. Playing with seasoned players can be difficult because they have years of experience and some don't even try to stop it from seeping into their character.
Vanilla style games. I like a little gray in my world so I prefer if not everything is evil that you have to deal with. That sometimes you are faced with making a hard choice.
Modern ethics in a fantasy world. This is a huge one for me. Most fantasy worlds are not the USA of the 21 century with equal rights, Miranda laws, Geneva conventions and so on.
Lonewolf characters. They just don't work at a table with other players and makes my job as the DM harder.
Rouges who steal all the time. I have rouges to be the most disruptive class at the table. They steal from the people helping to keep them alive. Even when they have gold they prefer to take a chance stealing from the shops. And they get angry when the party has had enough and leaves them to their fate.
Character Equality. I hate point buy it makes boring characters. I have in my 30 so years of playing never seen an issue with not having fun or being marginalized because someone else had better stats.
PC Plot Protection. The game revolves around the PC but the world does not. PCs should not be treated like special snowflakes. I don't care how powerful you are mouthing off to the king of the land is a bad idea and there will always be bigger fish.
High Level PCs acting like tyrants. I hate the attitude well we are 15 level the town guard is only 3 so they can't hurt us. Which is why I often level the world along with the PCs.
Melkor
Explorer
The way of playing that requires or stresses the use of miniatures or precise tactical positioning. In my opinion, this started with 3E and got worse with 4E.
I know some people love miniatures, and those systems/games worked great for them, so it's awesome that those editions exist for them to enjoy, It is just completely incompatible with the way I enjoy playing D&D.
In addition to that, thedungeondelver nailed my other two with the following quotes:
I know some people love miniatures, and those systems/games worked great for them, so it's awesome that those editions exist for them to enjoy, It is just completely incompatible with the way I enjoy playing D&D.
In addition to that, thedungeondelver nailed my other two with the following quotes:
![[OMENRPG]Ben](/data/avatars/m/6677/6677983.jpg?1565264961){kind=avatar}
[OMENRPG]Ben
First Post
Players who don't seem to value game time. This goes along with what people have said up-thread about interruptions, but I have had quite a large percentage of gamers not seem to really care what is happening in game or that they are at a table.
For example, someone who sits and texts on his or her phone the whole night, someone who is more interested in the news, someone who insists on listening to music or having the TV on as "background noise", people who hold extensive and disruptive side conversations, someone who insists on bringing his or her significant other and then making cuddly-kissy-poo in the corner/at the table all night, etc etc.
I think this is a level of maturity and the fact that I try to bring in a lot of brand new or casual players, especially into my system, but if I'm going to put hundreds of hours of preparation and thought into a campaign I at least would like a little attention paid for the four hours we sit at the table.
If you don't want to play any more, just say so and leave. I promise I'll act like my feelings aren't hurt
For example, someone who sits and texts on his or her phone the whole night, someone who is more interested in the news, someone who insists on listening to music or having the TV on as "background noise", people who hold extensive and disruptive side conversations, someone who insists on bringing his or her significant other and then making cuddly-kissy-poo in the corner/at the table all night, etc etc.
I think this is a level of maturity and the fact that I try to bring in a lot of brand new or casual players, especially into my system, but if I'm going to put hundreds of hours of preparation and thought into a campaign I at least would like a little attention paid for the four hours we sit at the table.
If you don't want to play any more, just say so and leave. I promise I'll act like my feelings aren't hurt
Pretty much the exact opposite of everything this guy says.
jbear
First Post
PCs who turn on each other or can't find ways to work together. Actually, now that I think about it, I don't like evil PCs. Unaligned or neutral is fine. But not purely evil.
I also don't like cheating from my players.
Or arguing about DM decisions while at the table. DM aint god but s/he is running the game. Agree or disagree, the time to talk about an issue is in between sessions. SO I can't abide players that won't accept that norm. Not far behind are distrustful players who think its them vs DM and the Dm is playing with an unfair hand and basically cheating behind the screen. I do most of my rolling in the open and very very rarely fudge. I need my players to trust that I play as fairly and consistently as possible.
I also don't like players who "diplomicise": eg "I use diplomacy on the guard". Err ... no you don't. You tell me what it is you do and if needs be I'll ask you to roll something or not.
I also dislike when players who initiate situations are picked on or criticised by pedantically careful players, as if their way of playing was the better way. D&D is about doing things and dealing with the consequences for me. I like players who simply walk into places or boldly do things. It gets the game moving. Many players fail to realise that THEY set the pace of the game, not the DM, in many instances.
As a player I can't stand it when a DM tells me what my character does. Eg walking into a tomb unaware that it is seething with undead. DM tells me I am overwhelmed with fear as the dead begin to rise and I ran away and in the chaos several of the undead escape from the tomb into town. Err ... actually my character would prefer to face the consequences of his actions and stand his ground, because that's his nature, even if that means he is torn limb from limb.
I also don't like it when a DM requires you to ask the exact specific question they are wanting to hear before revealing information. And if you don't find that bit of information the game can't move forward.
I also dislike it when the group has decimated the ranks of lets say a gang of bandits. 3 out of 5 of them are dead, and perhaps one of the other 2 bloodied/near death. But despite PC attempts to have them surrender and have the fight draw quickly to a close, they for some reason decide to fight to the bitter end. Monsters should value their lives too, shouldn't they?
I'm sure there are other things that I would dislike but I haven't encountered yet.
I also don't like cheating from my players.
Or arguing about DM decisions while at the table. DM aint god but s/he is running the game. Agree or disagree, the time to talk about an issue is in between sessions. SO I can't abide players that won't accept that norm. Not far behind are distrustful players who think its them vs DM and the Dm is playing with an unfair hand and basically cheating behind the screen. I do most of my rolling in the open and very very rarely fudge. I need my players to trust that I play as fairly and consistently as possible.
I also don't like players who "diplomicise": eg "I use diplomacy on the guard". Err ... no you don't. You tell me what it is you do and if needs be I'll ask you to roll something or not.
I also dislike when players who initiate situations are picked on or criticised by pedantically careful players, as if their way of playing was the better way. D&D is about doing things and dealing with the consequences for me. I like players who simply walk into places or boldly do things. It gets the game moving. Many players fail to realise that THEY set the pace of the game, not the DM, in many instances.
As a player I can't stand it when a DM tells me what my character does. Eg walking into a tomb unaware that it is seething with undead. DM tells me I am overwhelmed with fear as the dead begin to rise and I ran away and in the chaos several of the undead escape from the tomb into town. Err ... actually my character would prefer to face the consequences of his actions and stand his ground, because that's his nature, even if that means he is torn limb from limb.
I also don't like it when a DM requires you to ask the exact specific question they are wanting to hear before revealing information. And if you don't find that bit of information the game can't move forward.
I also dislike it when the group has decimated the ranks of lets say a gang of bandits. 3 out of 5 of them are dead, and perhaps one of the other 2 bloodied/near death. But despite PC attempts to have them surrender and have the fight draw quickly to a close, they for some reason decide to fight to the bitter end. Monsters should value their lives too, shouldn't they?
I'm sure there are other things that I would dislike but I haven't encountered yet.
Crazy Jerome
First Post
I can't stand "story gaming" or "system mastery" as explicated earlier, either. 
I want meaningful decision points in play--character and player, and both of those work against having such.
Otherwise, I'm a "the spirit of the game is king" kind of guy. I want that when I play, and I enforce it when I DM. I'm open to a wide range in the "spirit of the game". I've got my pet preferences when DMing, and some things that I generally insist upon for my own fun, but when someone else is running, I want them to run their game. Just tell me what it is so that I can get into the real spirit of it.
Example, I'm not much of a hack and slasher. But if you gave me the choice of two DMs--one running a campaign on subject matter I enjoy, system I enjoy, characters I enjoy, etc... in a railroad or "stupid player tricks" required--the other a hack and slash fest in my least favorite sub genre of fantasy with cardboard characters, etc... and decisions matter--I'll pick the second one every time. I can manage to have fun in it.
I want meaningful decision points in play--character and player, and both of those work against having such. Otherwise, I'm a "the spirit of the game is king" kind of guy. I want that when I play, and I enforce it when I DM. I'm open to a wide range in the "spirit of the game". I've got my pet preferences when DMing, and some things that I generally insist upon for my own fun, but when someone else is running, I want them to run their game. Just tell me what it is so that I can get into the real spirit of it.
Example, I'm not much of a hack and slasher. But if you gave me the choice of two DMs--one running a campaign on subject matter I enjoy, system I enjoy, characters I enjoy, etc... in a railroad or "stupid player tricks" required--the other a hack and slash fest in my least favorite sub genre of fantasy with cardboard characters, etc... and decisions matter--I'll pick the second one every time. I can manage to have fun in it.
Similar Threads
