Susaga @ Susaga @ttrpg.network

Posts

2

Comments

276

Joined

2 yr. ago

From the example you gave, you haven't experienced it either. And the reason I haven't experienced it is because, as the DM, I didn't throw Bahamut at a problem player and just warned them to either cut it out or be kicked from the game. The game then improved for everyone remaining.

Hold on... If I leave the shit pit, I won't be invited back into the shit pit? And that's a bad thing?

You wanna know why I'm so passionate? Because you're infuriating. Because you're writing entire essays about things nobody has been talking about and calling ME passionate about it. Because "rip out the role playing" isn't something anyone has mentioned directly or otherwise. Because everyone keeps replying to me without responding to me. Nobody has explained why it's good to remain in the shit pit for a second longer than absolutely necessary.

If you're in a pit and it's full of shit, either remove the shit or leave the shit pit. I don't get why that's controversial to say.

You absolutely ARE questioning their right to a power fantasy. The "hey, maybe turn down the murderhoboing" is the "are you sure" before you kick them from the table. I'm not going to coddle them and never question their right to be at the table, or their right to have their characters die satisfying deaths. I'm removing all power they have in the game in a single sentence.

Nobody. I just don't approve of vindictive DMing. I don't like spending time doing things that make me miserable so long as it makes others even more miserable. It's weird that so many people disagree.

Correct. Both the players and the DM are being arseholes. Why the fuck are you defending the DM for doing what the players are doing?

You're comparing the nineteen word meme that frames vindictive DMing as a natural consequence, rather than an unhealthy response to antagonism, to an experience you had that was, as far as I can see, entirely unrelated. Making the best of a shit situation you've been put in is to leave that situation. If you're in a pit full of shit, don't make marshmallows and sing songs. Either remove the shit or get out of the pit. Stop trying to argue that it's fine to remain in the shit pit.

It's a perfect example of something ONLY YOU have been talking about. The enforcement of expectations in your example was made using things that were already in the game in order to make the game fun. That's not what other people have been talking about.

Please fucking read my comment. I did not say it was SOLELY the DM's job. I said it was EVERYONE's job, DM included. Please respond to what people ACTUALLY SAY. Yes, it's a group activity, but if everyone in the group wants one thing and one person wants something else, they should leave that group. It doesn't matter if that person is a DM or a player.

Holy fuck, are you not paying attention? It does not matter if it was sudden or not. If it got to the point that the DM was willing to twist the narrative to kill the entire party, they should have already left.

I haven't been traumatised. Heck, I've barely ever been a player. I just don't know why people are being so defensive of vindictive DMing. It's deeply unhealthy. Doms do need aftercare, but they also shouldn't go into their fun with spite on their mind.

Your example is NOT an example, because that player was not murderhoboing. You weren't vindictively adding an element to the game to get him killed, you were organically reacting to their actions with details that had already been established. Your consequence made sense, and it made the game more fun for everyone involved.

It is a DM's job to make sure everyone had fun at the end of the session, DM included. Technically, that's everyone's job, but the DM is the one with more authority. This doesn't mean bad things can't happen, but nobody should be outright miserable. If one person's fun would detract from someone else's fun, then either a frank conversation is needed or someone should leave to find that fun elsewhere.

What the hell is the meme you're looking at? In the meme I see, the DM is annoyed by the current environment of murderhoboing and responds by introducing a Bahomet in a way where the players clearly don't know who he is and haven't met him before. The DM chose to add him, just like they chose every element of the campaign thus far and they chose to continue playing among murderhobos. The only reason Bahomet was included was as a punishment, and it's fucking baffling you insist that's not what's happening.

I can think of several reasons to have a god show up in a game. I can only think of one reason to respond to the players being murderhobos by introducing a god in an innocent disguise and saying "try it, bitch". What do you think is the point of the meme if not "the players are being murderhobos, so I'm going to punish them by making them pick a fight with a god"?

You assumed my assumption, but it honestly doesn't matter if it came out of nowhere or not. Step one is talking to the players like adults about the problem. Step two is removing a player from the game, possibly yourself. There is never enough buildup to justify introducing an OP enemy to guaranteed kill your players as a punishment. Even if there was, you should have left the game long before that point, and should leave the game now instead of firing that big gun.

Why do players need to acknowledge it in game? That's not where the problem is. The problem is among the players, not the characters. You don't solve OOC problems within the game.

I don't think I'm the one assuming a lot of stuff and missing the point here.

I'm the kinda guy that stopped watching a 12 episode series on episode 11. I don't regret it. It wasn't a story worth completing.

Then why do you need to finish the session? Just quit on the spot and see what you can make of the rest of your evening.

Why? You're not having fun playing that game. What you want to do won't be fun for everyone else. You didn't like the game to begin with, so there's no point in giving it a satisfying conclusion. There are better things you could do, like setting up a game you'd prefer. Why waste your time playing that last session?

"We attack this random old man!"
"Gotcha! It was a Dragon God in disguise!"

You see how it's a trick? You see the deception?

If you live in a high-crime area and put a shotgun trap behind your door, then you are guilty for the murder of anyone who dies trying to break into your house. Should they have tried to break into your house? No. Should you have killed them? Also no. You're not in the right just because they're in the wrong. It doesn't work that way.

Why is throwing Bahamut at the players knowing they'll pick a fight with him a better solution than just talking to them?

I agree entirely, I just offer a warning first. And either way, you don't keep playing so you can throw Bahamut at them.

If you don't want to play in the type of game the other players want to play in, you leave. That's the same for regular players and the GM. If it's just one or two people making it less fun for other people, you kick them. No need to keep playing with them so you can punish them in game. I never get far enough in the game to punish that kind of player, because they're already gone.

Honestly, this runs on the same logic as murder hobos. You're not having fun, so you decide to get your fun by ruining someone else's.

Nobody said "hey, maybe turn down the murdurhoboing?", they chose to trick the players into attacking a god.

But you're not balancing the game. You're not adding a powerful BBEG. You're putting a GOD in their path specifically to threaten the players into submission, even goading the players into action with that little "try it, bitch". You're showing the exact same antagonism, desrespect for the world and propensity for violence as the players are. I don't care who did it first.

Just fucking talk to them. Like people do. Say "hey, maybe turn down the murdurhoboing?" instead of jumping to killing them. It's the DM's job to mediate the game and solve disputes as they arise so everyone has fun. Do your fucking job.

Edit: It's always funny how unreasonably upset people get when you suggest talking through problems in a game played entirely through talking.

Is that not just the DM equivelant of being a murder hobo?

Ever seen Interspecies Reviewers? This comes up. There are fun, sexy things you can do that aren't just putting dick into hole.

Terry

Yeah, exactly. It's not someone dodging a lot, but someone asking a lot that's abnormal.

Fun fact: That's just an average amount of question dodging. Paxman had to stall for time and realised he could just stretch it out by getting the guy to actually answer the question.