RIDICULOUS House Rules - A Place to Vent About Your Crazy DM

312 posts / 0 new
Last post
I should clarify. All evidence we found points towards the evilness and desperation of the wizard/cleric/mystic theurge. He had a torture chamber (with long dried blood). Active mindless undead in his basement (there wasn't anyone else around to create them) and a trapped paladin that was the son of a hero that (presumabley) the wiz/clr/myt had turned into a ghast. He had trapped a quasit and a nymph in his tower and bound them so they couldn't leave, as well as a pair of earth elementals. He died because he accidentally trapped himself in his tower. He bound all the other creatures (except the djinni I guess, who was there of his own free will as well) to see if they could escape, but they couldn't, so he kept them trapped in tiny little force cages. I think its fair to assume that he was a bad bad man.

And those summoned creatures, we released them without conflict. Even the initially hostile earth elementals, we calmed them down and told them they were free. Except for the quasit, because we didn't trust him. The ex-paladin ghast did get killed though. He assaulted us in his urge to flee, so he seemed like any other ghast. After he drained a level from the monk, we didn't listen to his 'let me out, let me out'.

I can accept that it can be considered chaotic from one point of view, but not evil. Not evil unless it is always evil to fight good aligned creatures regardless of circumstances.

And no, we hadn't acted chaotic or evil prior to this. In fact we trekked down two stories of trap filled dungeon to rescue some kidnapped orphans, where the monk died the first time.

While I stand by my logic based on previous assumptions, I completely change my opinion about the actual situation. Your DM was a D-bag for having a Lawful Good Dijin voluntarily guard an evil wizard's treasure. That is a pretty lame alignment trap. I would not even move you a whole alignment towards chaotic. I think I would move you a tick towards chaotic and a tick towards evil, but you would keep your current alignment until you grossly abused it later on down the road.
Is walking up to a Dijin that is bound to guard a chest and asking it (however nicely) to let you remove the items from said chest a reasonable thing to do?: Sure.

Is it reasonable to expect said Dijin to hand over said booty?: No

Is it reasonable to then attempt to physically take the items in question and expect the Dijin not to try and physically stop you?: No

Once the Dijin (in it's fit or unreasonablness) physically trys to stop you from taking the treasure, is it reasonable to use force to save your skins?: Yes, but since it was unreasonable to attempt this course of action in the first place, and it was reasonable to expect the Dijin to defend the treasure, any damage to the Dijin is unlawful.

[example excepted]

Does that seem like Lawful Good burgler to you? Does this situation seem "reasonable"?

Ok, at what point did I say that the actions were reasonable? Or were Lawful Good? I said that they tried to be reasonable first rather than walking in and just killing it, and I said that the actions could have been lawful. I also said that I could see a paladin falling over it, depending on exactly how things happened, which pretty strongly implies that I didn't think this was Lawful Good. Lastly, I am arguing that what they did was not chaotic or evil enough to merit instant alignment shifts. (To me the law/chaos of the action depends on a lot of other stuff which we don't know, mostly the circumstances of them undertaking the mission, although I would probably peg it as evil).

If the world has such strict alignment, how does the LG Djinni get off serving such an evil master, and being his personal friend? If a paladin was acting like that, I would expect him to fall (in a typical game anyway, there being such variance over these things).

This is not a group of burglars breaking into a house. This is a group of adventurers suppressing a menace to the area, and seeking spoils at the same time. The treaure wasn't being used by anyone, or serving any useful purpose, and they had a noble cause which it could support. There are plenty of games where that greater good argument would have made this a good act (especially since depending on the setting, the Djinni wouldn't even be dead, just returned to its home plane). Not that they had every right to it, but it isn't an outrageous thing to do in my mind (again, from some assumptions about the circumstances of them taking the tower). They could easily have had every right to that treasure depending on the law of the land.

I'm not saying that every D+D game should treat alignment the same way, and certainly this game seems very interested in the players not just reacting to enemies as evil things to be destroyed. But this seems a bit too touchy to me, especially as evidenced by a player being so frustrated by it.

How about this analogy, which is at least as relevant as your own:
The players need to find artifact X in order to save the world, and can only be used by paladins. However it is being guarded by a Djinni, who refuses to let the players have it (not through trade, negotiations, etc) as the previous owner, now dead, had tasked him to protect it. The players take it by force, because the need is great. Now the paladin should fall and the world be doomed?

We should probably stop this threadjack - this isn't really the place to be discussing the notoriously thorny issue of alignment.

Edit: Ah, just saw your last post. I think my added example isn't really necessary now, since I see that your problem was in large part an issue of the circumstances that the encounter took place in, same as me. I just read different things into the original post.
Burgler: "Could you please step aside so that I can take your $3000 Alienware PC?"
You: "No!"
Burgler: "I said please, and I feel that I deserve it, so could you please stand aside?"
You: "Are you mad, get the frack out of my house!"
Burgler: "Well then I guess I will have to take it." He steps up and attempts to take the PC.
You: Pushing him away, "Try that again and I will pound you with this bat!"
Burgler: Sighs, pulls out a gun, and shoots you in the leg. The wound should not be lethal, but nicks an artery and you bleed to death. The Burgler walks away with a fancy new PC and whistling a happy tune knowing that his concience is clean because he tried to be reasonable and did not mean to use lethal force.

Does that seem like Lawful Good burgler to you? Does this situation seem "reasonable"?

Burgler: "Hey, whats this secret door"
You: "Do not step into this room, for I shall have to slay you if you do."
Burgler: "Calm down. Why are you locked in this room with an alienware 3000 PC that you have no use for."
You: "Tim asked me to guard it."
Burgler: "You know Tim died thirty-odd years ago, right?"
You: "I don't care, he asked me to guard it."
Burgler: "Look, Tim has no use for it, neither do you. I, however, am going to try and use it to save dozens of orphans. Please step aside and let me take the computer."
You: "No, I don't care how many orphans you want to save, Tim wanted me to guard this computer, he was my friend."
Burgler: "You know, Tim murdered people, you know that right? He pulled their organs out and turned them into undead. You know Jason, the president's son? Yeah, he did that to him to. I know you haven't gotten out of this room that he locked you in for a while, so you might not know about Jenny, who he's kept trapped in a cage, or Steve and Suzy, that he locked in a broom closet."
You: "It doesn't matter, Tim bound me to guard it."
Burgler: "Fine, I'll figure out how to unbind you."
You: "NO!"
Burgler: "Fine." runs in and tries to snag mouse
You: Hit's Burgler with baseball bat.
Burgler: "Seriously, stop that or I will beat you senseless."
You: "You've entered the chamber, you must die. I told you not to."
Burgler: "Fine" Karate chop "Well, crap. I broke his neck, didn't mean to. That really sucks. It's too bad Tim put a loyal guy in a position like that. But then again, the orphans await, I'd better not lose any time."

Thats a little bit more like how it went down. That sounds a lot like a lawful good burgler to me.
Resident Shakespeare
Burgler: "Hey, whats this secret door"
You: "Do not step into this room, for I shall have to slay you if you do."
Burgler: "Calm down. Why are you locked in this room with an alienware 3000 PC that you have no use for."
You: "Tim asked me to guard it."
Burgler: "You know Tim died thirty-odd years ago, right?"
You: "I don't care, he asked me to guard it."
Burgler: "Look, Tim has no use for it, neither do you. I, however, am going to try and use it to save dozens of orphans. Please step aside and let me take the computer."
You: "No, I don't care how many orphans you want to save, Tim wanted me to guard this computer, he was my friend."
Burgler: "You know, Tim murdered people, you know that right? He pulled their organs out and turned them into undead. You know Jason, the president's son? Yeah, he did that to him to. I know you haven't gotten out of this room that he locked you in for a while, so you might not know about Jenny, who he's kept trapped in a cage, or Steve and Suzy, that he locked in a broom closet."
You: "It doesn't matter, Tim bound me to guard it."
Burgler: "Fine, I'll figure out how to unbind you."
You: "NO!"
Burgler: "Fine." runs in and tries to snag mouse
You: Hit's Burgler with baseball bat.
Burgler: "Seriously, stop that or I will beat you senseless."
You: "You've entered the chamber, you must die. I told you not to."
Burgler: "Fine" Karate chop "Well, crap. I broke his neck, didn't mean to. That really sucks. It's too bad Tim put a loyal guy in a position like that. But then again, the orphans await, I'd better not lose any time."

Thats a little bit more like how it went down. That sounds a lot like a lawful good burgler to me.

Yea, that sounds more like what you said. Your DM is clearly being a D-bag.

Edit: Ah, just saw your last post. I think my added example isn't really necessary now, since I see that your problem was in large part an issue of the circumstances that the encounter took place in, same as me. I just read different things into the original post.

;)
No matter what we were doing, if you roled a 1 on a d20, you took 1d4 damage. My character tripped and stabbed himself just trying to open an unlocked door so many times we had to find another player to play a cleric just to survive.
{This lead to many requests to the DM for xp for succesfully managing to walk 20 ft. without breaking out the d4.}
He sold universal antidotes at general stores for 6gp that never worked against any poison an npc used, but was effective when I ingeniously drained and crafted a sleeping poison from a homebrew giant snake type monster and coated my daggers with it. It regained uselessness only when I roled a 1 and nicked myself. Again.
On third shift I imagine.


Support Cedric Diggory, the real Hogwarts Champion!
Burgler: "Hey, whats this secret door"
You: "Do not step into this room, for I shall have to slay you if you do."
Burgler: "Calm down. Why are you locked in this room with an alienware 3000 PC that you have no use for."
You: "Tim asked me to guard it."
Burgler: "You know Tim died thirty-odd years ago, right?"
You: "I don't care, he asked me to guard it."
Burgler: "Look, Tim has no use for it, neither do you. I, however, am going to try and use it to save dozens of orphans. Please step aside and let me take the computer."
You: "No, I don't care how many orphans you want to save, Tim wanted me to guard this computer, he was my friend."
Burgler: "You know, Tim murdered people, you know that right? He pulled their organs out and turned them into undead. You know Jason, the president's son? Yeah, he did that to him to. I know you haven't gotten out of this room that he locked you in for a while, so you might not know about Jenny, who he's kept trapped in a cage, or Steve and Suzy, that he locked in a broom closet."
You: "It doesn't matter, Tim bound me to guard it."
Burgler: "Fine, I'll figure out how to unbind you."
You: "NO!"
Burgler: "Fine." runs in and tries to snag mouse
You: Hit's Burgler with baseball bat.
Burgler: "Seriously, stop that or I will beat you senseless."
You: "You've entered the chamber, you must die. I told you not to."
Burgler: "Fine" Karate chop "Well, crap. I broke his neck, didn't mean to. That really sucks. It's too bad Tim put a loyal guy in a position like that. But then again, the orphans await, I'd better not lose any time."

Thats a little bit more like how it went down. That sounds a lot like a lawful good burgler to me.

that most definitely is not a lawful good burglar, as burglary is entering a place with the intent to commit a crime. hence, chaotic good burglar, or perhaps even neutral good :D
that most definitely is not a lawful good burglar, as burglary is entering a place with the intent to commit a crime. hence, chaotic good burglar, or perhaps even neutral good :D

I don't know. I think that following your concsience and your orders rules to re-allocate wealth from an evil wizard to a good order to pay for the care of orphans is very lawful.
I don't know. I think that following your concsience and your orders rules to re-allocate wealth from an evil wizard to a good order to pay for the care of orphans is very lawful.

Well, the money is going towards the rescue and safe return of orphans (and other assorted missing persons, including a halfing, which is a lot like a child), from the evil cult of Demigorgon. But those are similar goals.

-----------------------------------------

I'd just remembered something else, it wasn't a house rule so much as a mis-rule. But when the djinni turned into a 'whirlwind' he was "not actually the whirlwind" but rather "somewhere unseeable (not invisible) inside the whirlwind, nor is he automatically in the center of the whirlwind." The djinni could not be detected. Period. Detect Magic, See Invisible, Blindsense, or even Blindsight. The Djinni was for any and all given methods, entirely unfindable and targetable (but you could guess where in the 30ft maelstrom he was if you wanted). I had to pull out my own copy of the DMG (which I do not often do) to inform him that was utter poppycock, and that the djinni was indeed the whirlwind.
Resident Shakespeare
I don't know. I think that following your concsience and your orders rules to re-allocate wealth from an evil wizard to a good order to pay for the care of orphans is very lawful.

If your orders rules say "Steal from the Evil Rich and give to the Good Poor", I'd say that order isn't very lawful. ;) It sounds more like ritualized Chaotic Good to me... but , then again, ritualizing something, making it bound by rules and then follow those rules is Lawful, so.. Hmm.. Ok, maybe I should shut up ;)
One of my good friends decided to try DM'ing a couple years ago. He hadn't played 3rd ed before and wanted to give it a shot. I had been playing it for at least 3 years by that time so I knew how things worked but he was under the impression that a lot of things were unbalanced. Some (on-the-fly) house rules he made:

1. Characters could only attack enemies that they were facing.

2. Turning around in your square provoked attacks of opportunity.

3. You could only get the +2 flanking bonus or sneak attack if you were behind the enemy.

4. 5-foot step rule was removed.

There may have been others but I can't really recall. I think monsters and NPCs also ignored some of those house rules as well. He also railroaded things big time and all NPCs were atheists and thought my Cleric of Pelor was loony and heard voices.

This isn't really a house rule but another good friend of mine who made some great stories once told me that he never gave his monsters any HP, he just said that they died when he figured they should.
How's this for ridiculous:

Our DM had a dumb critical miss rule where if you roll a 1 to hit, you then have to roll against your own AC to hit yourself. This was because "uhh .... I don't know, something bad has to happen on a critical miss."

In one fight, our archer (who had 10 levels in Order of the Bow Initiate) rolled a 1 to hit a monster.

Our DM had him roll to hit himself. He rolled a natural 1 again.

This is where it gets screwy. The DM decided that since he had critically missed himself, he should roll to hit the enemy he was originally aiming for.

"What?"

Our master archer rolled to hit the enemy. He rolled a 20 and confirmed the crit.

And that's how our archer scored a crit with a natural 1.

There were so many things that were wrong with that campaign ... it was one enormous Deus Ex Machina. I could rant for hours.
How's this for ridiculous:

Our DM had a dumb critical miss rule where if you roll a 1 to hit, you then have to roll against your own AC to hit yourself. This was because "uhh .... I don't know, something bad has to happen on a critical miss."

In one fight, our archer (who had 10 levels in Order of the Bow Initiate) rolled a 1 to hit a monster.

Our DM had him roll to hit himself. He rolled a natural 1 again.

This is where it gets screwy. The DM decided that since he had critically missed himself, he should roll to hit the enemy he was originally aiming for.

"What?"

Our master archer rolled to hit the enemy. He rolled a 20 and confirmed the crit.

And that's how our archer scored a crit with a natural 1.

There were so many things that were wrong with that campaign ... it was one enormous Deus Ex Machina. I could rant for hours.

I actually consider that really funny myself. Though that is a screwy rule and if I had the same thing happen in a game I was playing in, I would stop the DM after the second crit miss and recommend rolling randomly on who the next target might be, even if the target wasn't in line of sight at that preticular moment as that would lead to possibly even more homurous happenings.
I actually consider that really funny myself. Though that is a screwy rule and if I had the same thing happen in a game I was playing in, I would stop the DM after the second crit miss and recommend rolling randomly on who the next target might be, even if the target wasn't in line of sight at that preticular moment as that would lead to possibly even more homurous happenings.

It would be funnier if it wasn't so sad and it didn't happen so often. His judgments weren't based on logic, they were either to maintain consistency with his previously designed rules (like above) or to maintain superiority over the players (like below).

This one makes me cry at night.

Our cleric (18th level with the Domination domain) decided to go gather up a great wyrm bronze dragon as his Monstrous Thrall. The save DC was 34, with a -4 penalty (so basically 38). The dragon would fail on a 7 or lower, and he prepared 3 of them.

First, the DM rolled the save.

DM: "He flies away."

Cleric: "Hey, I saw that! You rolled a 2!"

DM: "It doesn't work. He flies away."

Cleric: ... "Okay, I'll go and find another dragon."

DM: "There aren't any more bronze dragons."

Cleric: "I don't care, I'll go for any kind of dragon."

DM: "You don't find any."

Cleric: "What? You mean like on the entire continent? I spend 10 years searching, I think that's enough for a cleric with divinations to search the whole continent"

DM: "Nope. The one you tried to dominate warned all the other dragons, and they all ran away."

Cleric: "Ran away where?"

DM: "You don't know. Now you've wasted 10 years, and that blighted wasteland you were supposed to investigate has spread into your realm."

Then the DM tried to appease him. When we dutifully took the next step in his railroad plot and furthered the storyline, we found at the end of the session a treasure hoard with guess what? ... A bronze dragon egg, and a one-use scroll that ages a dragon to Ancient.

But wait ...

DM: "Okay, you use the scroll, and the dragon gets bigger, so it's Gargantuan now. But it's still just a wyrmling, so all of its stats stay the same."

Cleric: "I thought it actually aged the dragon."

DM: "No, it just ages the body, so it's still basically a wyrmling."

Cleric: "So its mental ability scores are still like a wyrmling's?"

DM: "No, all of its stats are still the same. It's just bigger. You have a cool dragon mount now."

Cleric: "So it's Gargantuan, but its Strength is still 10?"

DM: "Yep."

AAAARGH!!!!
house rules can be fun though. one game I was in back in second ed, we used the rolemaster charts for crits and fumbles and the archer npc class from one of the best of dragon magazines.

the archer fumbled multiple occasions and tore an ear off. to balance this out, it was easily reattached. something like hold in place and cast cure light.

in this same campaign, each character was allowed a god call to avoid nasty things like a TPK.

the one time there was a total party kill, the DM changed it into a shared nightmare for all the characters.
AAAARGH!!!!

Why do people do this? What gain is there to this mode of action? why not just be mature and say "I'd really rather you not make a dragon into your thrall, as it will break the game." and come to a compromise with the player? Is it really that fun to fellate yourself in front of your players like that? :headexplo
AAAARGH!!!!

That DM would have gotten my foot up side his head if he pulled to many things like that. I think I could stand it happening once but if he pulled something simular in a later session or the same night, I would bring a quick end to the campaign and game. After which I would of tossed my name in for DM and moved on with my life. Being the DM should be left to those people who will work at doing it right for the sake of the Story and the players.
the one time there was a total party kill, the DM changed it into a shared nightmare for all the characters.

Bad case of deus ex machina. Reminds me of this one chapter in my latin book...
Nonetheless BAD case of deus ex machina!

It makes me mad... :headexplo

Even divine intervention (deus ex machina in its true form) would have been better than that!!!!

Perhaps a trip to the underworld....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deus_ex_machina
That DM would of gotten my foot up side his head if he pulled to many things like that. I think I could stand it happening once but if he pulled something simular in a later session or the same night, I would bring a quick end to the campaign and game. After which I would of tossed my name in for DM and moved on with my life. Being the DM should be left to those people who will work at doing it right for the sake of the Story and the players.

Thing was, he did it every session. The whole campaign was like a power trip for him. Unfortunately, I'm the regular DM for my group (nobody else wants to), and so I was pretty starved for actually playing a PC. So we put up with it for a while. We even explained to him (nicely) that we weren't satisfied with his DMing and gave some suggestions on what to improve on. It went in one ear and out the other.

So, I pulled Pun-Pun on him, because I wanted an excuse to end it without him asking every week "so do you guys want to play my game or what?" A great deal of ridiculousness later and the whole party was composed of overdeities with infinite divine ranks, infinite stats and half the universe.

His BBEG, "Noddegamra," which is Armageddon spelled backwards, was the main villain, and defeating him was the point of the entire campaign. Defeating him entailed an epic adventure, which consisted of us going from plot point to plot point following the precise path that he mapped out. Everything we fought was ridiculously easy, but accomplishing anything beyond advancing the plot in the exact way that he wanted us to was nigh impossible.

We advanced in level ridiculously quickly - during his opening session, we (inevitably) found ourselves on Noddegamra's Star Destroyer-esque flagship, and got our level 9 butts handed to us ("Bwa ha ha! He's a level 100 Sorcerer!") and he gave us two levels for it. In no time, we were level 17, but we still couldn't affect the plot any more than when we were level 6.

So, at the very end, when as deities we were able to instantly know exactly what was going on, we found out that Noddegamra was an overdeity, and we were all actually just figments in Noddegamra's mind, stray thoughts or some such. Although we ended up with half the universe (it's hard to decide a contest between two infinitely powerful beings), that was the best outcome we could have possible hoped for. In the end, it would have required another massive fricking deus ex to even think about doing anything to Noddegamra, because the DM needed to exercise his superiority.

That's when we realized that Noddegamra was our DM. Literally. It's sad that we had to resort to some stupid rules trick to prove a point.

That's my story.
Thing was, he did it every session. The whole campaign was like a power trip for him. Unfortunately, I'm the regular DM for my group (nobody else wants to), and so I was pretty starved for actually playing a PC. So we put up with it for a while. We even explained to him (nicely) that we weren't satisfied with his DMing and gave some suggestions on what to improve on. It went in one ear and out the other.

So, I pulled Pun-Pun on him, because I wanted an excuse to end it without him asking every week "so do you guys want to play my game or what?" A great deal of ridiculousness later and the whole party was composed of overdeities with infinite divine ranks, infinite stats and half the universe.

His BBEG, "Noddegamra," which is Armageddon spelled backwards, was the main villain, and defeating him was the point of the entire campaign. Defeating him entailed an epic adventure, which consisted of us going from plot point to plot point following the precise path that he mapped out. Everything we fought was ridiculously easy, but accomplishing anything beyond advancing the plot in the exact way that he wanted us to was nigh impossible.

We advanced in level ridiculously quickly - during his opening session, we (inevitably) found ourselves on Noddegamra's Star Destroyer-esque flagship, and got our level 9 butts handed to us ("Bwa ha ha! He's a level 100 Sorcerer!") and he gave us two levels for it. In no time, we were level 17, but we still couldn't affect the plot any more than when we were level 6.

So, at the very end, when as deities we were able to instantly know exactly what was going on, we found out that Noddegamra was an overdeity, and we were all actually just figments in Noddegamra's mind, stray thoughts or some such. Although we ended up with half the universe (it's hard to decide a contest between two infinitely powerful beings), that was the best outcome we could have possible hoped for. In the end, it would have required another massive fricking deus ex to even think about doing anything to Noddegamra, because the DM needed to exercise his superiority.

That's when we realized that Noddegamra was our DM. Literally. It's sad that we had to resort to some stupid rules trick to prove a point.

That's my story.

You win. Nothing can ever beat that story.
That DM would of gotten my foot up side his head if he pulled to many things like that. I think I could stand it happening once but if he pulled something simular in a later session or the same night, I would bring a quick end to the campaign and game. After which I would of tossed my name in for DM and moved on with my life. Being the DM should be left to those people who will work at doing it right for the sake of the Story and the players.

Would HAVE.

Grah. #1 pet peeve of mine.
Wait...

You actually played Pun-Pun? Hardcore.
Wait...

You actually played Pun-Pun? Hardcore.

Yes. As a matter of fact, the whole party became Pun-Puns. I wasn't a kobold though, I was a 19th level half-orc warblade.

The only reason we ended up with half the universe instead of all of it was because he decided that Noddegamra interrupted our infinite action loop and immediately stripped away all of the powers we had just gained. Just when we were about to use the squirrels.

So we ripped open a gateway to another plane and did everything there, but by that time he had decided to do the same thing we were doing, and we all ended up infinite beings.
This one makes me cry at night…



…The only reason we ended up with half the universe instead of all of it was because he decided that Noddegamra interrupted our infinite action loop and immediately stripped away all of the powers we had just gained.

I feel your pain. Rarely have I seen such a vivid illustration of the fact that DMing is a privilege, not a right.
Thing was, he did it every session. The whole campaign was like a power trip for him. Unfortunately, I'm the regular DM for my group (nobody else wants to), and so I was pretty starved for actually playing a PC. So we put up with it for a while. We even explained to him (nicely) that we weren't satisfied with his DMing and gave some suggestions on what to improve on. It went in one ear and out the other.

So, I pulled Pun-Pun on him, because I wanted an excuse to end it without him asking every week "so do you guys want to play my game or what?" A great deal of ridiculousness later and the whole party was composed of overdeities with infinite divine ranks, infinite stats and half the universe.

His BBEG, "Noddegamra," which is Armageddon spelled backwards, was the main villain, and defeating him was the point of the entire campaign. Defeating him entailed an epic adventure, which consisted of us going from plot point to plot point following the precise path that he mapped out. Everything we fought was ridiculously easy, but accomplishing anything beyond advancing the plot in the exact way that he wanted us to was nigh impossible.

We advanced in level ridiculously quickly - during his opening session, we (inevitably) found ourselves on Noddegamra's Star Destroyer-esque flagship, and got our level 9 butts handed to us ("Bwa ha ha! He's a level 100 Sorcerer!") and he gave us two levels for it. In no time, we were level 17, but we still couldn't affect the plot any more than when we were level 6.

So, at the very end, when as deities we were able to instantly know exactly what was going on, we found out that Noddegamra was an overdeity, and we were all actually just figments in Noddegamra's mind, stray thoughts or some such. Although we ended up with half the universe (it's hard to decide a contest between two infinitely powerful beings), that was the best outcome we could have possible hoped for. In the end, it would have required another massive fricking deus ex to even think about doing anything to Noddegamra, because the DM needed to exercise his superiority.

That's when we realized that Noddegamra was our DM. Literally. It's sad that we had to resort to some stupid rules trick to prove a point.

That's my story.

Ouch, that story hurts my head. I guess I've been in a similar situation. Our BBEG had made wishes so that any one person could only ever do 1 damage to him total. Ever. There was some quest we were to go on to fix that, but we never did of course.

I feel your pain sir.
Well, the money is going towards the rescue and safe return of orphans (and other assorted missing persons, including a halfing, which is a lot like a child), from the evil cult of Demigorgon. But those are similar goals.

-----------------------------------------

I'd just remembered something else, it wasn't a house rule so much as a mis-rule. But when the djinni turned into a 'whirlwind' he was "not actually the whirlwind" but rather "somewhere unseeable (not invisible) inside the whirlwind, nor is he automatically in the center of the whirlwind." The djinni could not be detected. Period. Detect Magic, See Invisible, Blindsense, or even Blindsight. The Djinni was for any and all given methods, entirely unfindable and targetable (but you could guess where in the 30ft maelstrom he was if you wanted). I had to pull out my own copy of the DMG (which I do not often do) to inform him that was utter poppycock, and that the djinni was indeed the whirlwind.

Yeah... I'd go with Neutral Good.
Chaotic Good would probably have been appalled that the Djinn stood there for 30 years.
Lawful Good would have gotten evidence of the wizards illicit dealings and tried to prove it to the Djinn.
Either way, it was not Evil, or even Neutral. At least, if the characters felt remorse for killing him. If not... Neutral.
We have a guy who plays with us unregularly who is a serious grognard. Here's some rules he kept from previous playing and some he made up:


All this, along with the fact that the party is constantly running for their lives rather than having an actually fun campaign is a large part of the reason we simply don't invite him to play now.



*-Just for the record, I as a DM do not adjust rolls or boost enemies to allow them to hit. If they can only hit you on a 20, so be it.
Here is reality, read and understand: Rangers aren't dull or underpowered, in any edition. Fighters aren't dull or underpowered, in any edition. Casters aren't "god mode" or overpowered, in any edition. The tarrasque isn't broken. And you aren't voicing your opinion by claiming otherwise, you're just being a pain. Now, stop complaining.
Color me flattered.

LIFE CYCLE OF A RULES THREAD

Show
Thank_Dog wrote:

2Chlorobutanal wrote:
I think that if you have to argue to convince others about the clarity of something, it's probably not as objectively clear as you think.

No, what it means is that some people just like to be obtuse.

That's when we realized that Noddegamra was our DM. Literally. It's sad that we had to resort to some stupid rules trick to prove a point.

That's my story.

It's the ultimate Mary-Sue DMPC railroad FTW!!!
Something I wanted to mention:

Hated the idea of ToB or of any spells he was unfamiliar with being used. Use a power or spell he'd never heard of, and his first response was always, "How are you doing that?"

If a player was using a power or spell I'd never heard of, the game would come to a screeching halt. How do you wind up using material the DM isn't familiar with?

If he approved characters sight unseen, without being familiar with the material they were using or declaring which source material was permitted, he's incompetent.
how bout an absence of house rules or creative flavor. had a great group since freshmen year of high school that is breaking over a horrible dm that entered 2 years ago. the absolute worst possible combination of dm, power dm combined with a rule purist, he has sucked the creativity out of the group and our session have turned into one combat encounter after another resolved in the same exact way.

not saying the rules should be ignored, but he road blocks everything players try to do if its not covered in the rules, or you try and use something in a way other than intended. he only frustrates the situation by metagaming his decisions, no that breaks balance so they didnt want you to do it like that is a typical response.

only his style of play is reflected and the encounters he likes are present, pushes his idea of fantasy and character unto players, punishing characters that dont fit his idea of what a rogue, wizard, fighter should be, ridiculing the character at the table hitting them on missed rolls and making them miss on high rolls. plenty examples if you are interested, but my biggest complaint is that dms to much more damage to every ones fun when they power game.
The Event in Question or Defense Submits Evidence A to the Court


.....wow.

I was in one where the party began play with an NPC god in the form of a child in tow. EVERYTHING we did was met with "Grandma (an Uberdeity) isn't gonna like that!"

Of course, proceeding against the directions of a six-year-old resulted in the bodily appearance of a supergod who would do things to us with no save and force our compliance. I walked after I was forcibly compelled to bless the body of a goblin we slew (the only thing thus far in the story that wasn't a shapechanged djinn with 30 class levels).

There were a ton of houserules, and I didn't learn very many as it was a 'learn as you go' thing (other than he houseruled what skills/feats/gear/background/eye color/names/thoughts my character was allowed to have).

Really, I think these DM's are better off writing a novel than trying to run a cooperative storytelling game.

My group that I now DM, however, all discuss any house rules we want before play, and I usually expect them to make up things in the world related to their characters (a guild, family home, etc) to give them a jumping off point to roleplay from.
I've fortunately managed to avoid the sorts of DM that horror stories are told about, but I and my compatriots have run afoul of our fair share of houseruling stupidity.

1. One DM played things almost entirely by the books, except for a strange rule that applied only to wizards and sorcerers, and no other casters: Each spell slot was castable a number of times equal to its level, meaning that cantrips and 1st level spell slots were usable once, second level spells could be cast twice before they were considered "expended," and so on.

Oddly, nobody at that table even thought twice of it until I pointed it out.

2. Another group with which I've had some interaction begins all their campaigns as NPC classes and the DM makes the characters "earn" their PC class. I suppose that's all well and good, but I wouldn't go anywhere near a game where the DM counted a Commoner 5/Fighter2 as a 7th level character for the purposes of determining appropriate challenge levels.

3. Conversely to many of the stories about DMs barely giving their PCs clothing, let alone equipment, I had one DM begin a campaign at 5th level with two conditions: one, you must have magical ability of some sort, and two, you could take any equipment you wanted, so long as it was okayed by him.

I used the standard wealth by level charts for everything except an heirloom longbow that was somewhat central to my character concept. The DM sternly told me that the number of magical items I was wearing was completely inadequate and told me to upgrade my armor to celestial chain, my shortswords to +3 fiery and +3 icy, respectively, and handed me boots of the hinterlands, a cloak of elvenkind, rings of force shield and sustenance along with misc. other bits.

Once again, 5th level character. That campaign didn't last long.



Hmm. Those are all the bad ones I can think of for now. More later, perhaps.





Off topic: ...why does Gleemax think "Gleemax" and "DM" are typos?
-m4ki; one down, one to go

"Retro is not new. Retro-fit is not new." --Seeker95, on why I won't be playing DDN

|| DDN Metrics (0-10) | enthusiasm: 1 | confidence in design: -3 | desire to play: 0 | Sticking with 4e?: Yep. | Better Options: IKRPG Mk II ||
The Five Things D&D Next Absolutely Must Not Do:
1. Imbalanced gameplay. Any and all characters must be able to contribute equally both in combat and out of combat at all levels of play. If the Fighters are linear and the Wizards quadratic, I walk. 2. Hardcore simulationist approach. D&D is a game about heroic fantasy. I'm weak and useless enough in real life; I play RPGs for a change of pace. If the only reason a rule exists is because "that's how it's supposed to be", I walk. I don't want a game that "simulates" real life, I want a game that simulates heroic fantasy. 3. Worshipping at false idols (AKA Sacred Cows). If the only reason a rule exists is "it's always been that way", I walk. Now to be clear, I have no problem with some things not changing; my issue is with retaining bad idea simply for the sake of nostalgia. 4. DM vs. players. If the game encourages "gotcha!" moments or treats the DM and players as enemies, adversaries, or problems to be overcome, I walk. 5. Rules for the sake of rules. The only thing I want rules for is the things I can't do sitting around a table with my friends. If the rules try to step on my ability to roleplay the character I want to roleplay, I walk. Furthermore, the rules serve to facilitate gameplay, not to simulate the world. NOTE: Items in red have been violated.
Chris Perkins' DM Survival Tips:
1. When in doubt, wing it. 2. Keep the story moving. Go with the flow. 3. Sometimes things make the best characters. 4. Always give players lots of things to do. 5. Wherever possible, say ‘yes.’ 6. Cheating is largely unnecessary. 7. Don't be afraid to give the characters a fun new toy. 8. Don't get in the way of a good players exchange. 9. Avoid talking too much. 10. Save some details for later. 11. Be transparent. 12. Don't show all your cards. Words to live by.
Quotes From People Smarter Than Me:
"Essentials zigged, when I wanted to continue zagging..." -Foxface on Essentials "Servicing a diverse fan base with an RPG ruleset - far from being the mandate for 'open design space' and a cavalier attitude towards balance - requires creating a system that /works/, with minimal fuss, for a wide variety of play styles, not just from one group to the next, but at the same table." -Tony_Vargas on design "Mearls' and Cook's stated intent to produce an edition that fans of all previous editions (and Pathfinder) will like more than their current favourite edition is laudable. But it is also, IMO, completely unrealistic. It's like people who pray for world peace: I might share their overall aims, but I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for them to succeed. When they talk in vague terms about what they'd like to do in this new edition, I mostly find myself thinking 'hey, that sounds cool, assuming they can pull it off', but almost every time they've said something specific about actual mechanics, I've found myself wincing and shaking my head in disbelief and/or disgust, either straight away or after thinking about the obvious implications for half a minute." -Duskweaver on D&D Next
I once had a DM say that Neraph Charge didn't work on enemies with True Seeing, even though it's applied that the ability (of, in thes case feat) uses slight of hand to disguise the motion. He also ruled that enemies that couldn't see and used blind sight or the like were immune, because the ability is basically a use of slight of hand and body motions to produce a false read. I just about slapped him when he said that. Especially since the campaign was nearing epic at that point.
Blind sight I can understand, but true seeing?
Can't say for sure because I can't find the text.
Off topic: ...why does Gleemax think "Gleemax" and "DM" are typos?

It's not gleemax, it's Firefox (or whatever browser you use).
In one 2E game the DM decided to add penalties to your rolls based upon what percentage of hit points you have left because "you're near death and suffering pain". Of course, this just meant more PCs going into death's door more often.

In a 2E Planescape campaign, the DM divided up your hit points among body parts. When you are hit, the location is determined and that's where the hit points come from. If your right arm hit points reaches 0, you lose the arm or otherwise have it crippled, depending upon the situation. If it's your head, so sorry so sad. If you take overall body damage, such as from a fireball, divide the damage evenly among your body parts. Therefore, despite my fighter having 90 hit points, I only really had 28 hit points as that was what each body part had. Oh joy.
Support Cedric Diggory, the real Hogwarts Champion!
Nevermind.
Resident Shakespeare
House rules lets see...

1. Character creation, they can either roll the 4d6 and take out the lowest, 3d6 and replace the lowest total roll with an 18, or roll 1d20 and pray for good luck.

2. Skills-A natural 20 is an auto success, nat 1 is going to blow up in your face somehow.

Thats all I can think of right now.
House rules lets see...

1. Character creation, they can either roll the 4d6 and take out the lowest, 3d6 and replace the lowest total roll with an 18, or roll 1d20 and pray for good luck.

1d20 x6 for stats? That's ballsy. I'd go for it just for S&G.
had a DM for ages who forced arcane spell casters to take random starting spells, no input at all from the player,
player: ok i have this awsome idea to make a frost mage all my powers come from ice, my eyes are blue and the ground frosts over where i step,here are my stats
DM: sweet sounds cool, now here are your spells, mage hand, light, feather fall and whisper wind
player: umm dude there are no frost spells there, and come to think of it no attack spells either
DM: hmm guess not, ok are you ready to start
player: umm my frost mage is kinda underpowered
DM: not my fault, you going to play or not

I cant tell you how many arguments we had over the years!
Sign In to post comments