Critical Kunic

At what point would you have noped out of the game from my recent video? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VH5A...

#dungeonsanddragons #rpghorrorstories #tabletopgaming

2 years ago | [YT] | 29



@Titania77714

I would actually be okay with a five page backstory, namely because I'm one of those people who actively has to tone it down when writing one. (It's a flaw that I'm well aware of and actively try to avoid)

2 years ago | 2

@ReiReinaRei

I’ve written over 400k of fanfiction. A five page backstory is no problem. But losing player agency with the feats? No way in hell

2 years ago | 11  

@reloadpsi

Just checked the video for the first one that was mentioned, and picked that one. You know what I did when somebody wanted to make an artificer in my campaign setting that wouldn't have supported one due to its tech level? We discussed a realistic way for it to happen (made them almost druidic in nature, using bones and stuff) to do the exact same mechanics and basically just made it not be technological. He was playing a lizardfolk so we basically took that feature they get where they improvise weapons from their prey and treated the artificer abilities as though it were just expanding on that without having to change a single rule. The player came up with amazing ideas for it in terms of flavour and it was wonderful.

2 years ago (edited) | 3  

@charminglady2011

I didn't choose a 5 page backstory option, because back when I played, no one did more than 2 pages. The Dms then didn't have time to read our mini novels. Lol, not to say the good old days were better, they were definitely not! Edit: I do think what I do despise and caused me to stop playing is when agency is taken from you.

2 years ago (edited) | 2

@marydeyoung7501

I was wishing for an 'all of the above' option but settled for choosing artificers and bards being banned for PCs as my foremost reason for just saying 'nope' and finding another table. I figure if certain classes are banned, there may be other issues that will crop up with this DM, so best to avoid it altogether.

2 years ago | 6

@michaelelam4594

Five page backstory is a flag, but there is so much wrong here it's hard to tell her the actual "f this, I'm out!" Would come. The artificer and bard thing is concerning, the stats thing is a "hell, no!" And the feats is a "get your damned hands off my character before I stab you!" moment that seems it would possibly be the biggest part of forcing me to quit.

2 years ago | 3

@xRosaliax

So my vote is for the forced feats, without context. But going by the story, the moment I'd learned that the 5 page backstory I wrote was being thrown away for a hackneyed amnesia plot? Couldn't pay me to stay.

2 years ago | 6

@BlueTressym

The backstory one and I say that as someone who frequently writes detailed backstories. Also, why do people think Artificers have to be hi-tech? Nothing in their description says that. They create items and imbue them with magic and nothing says that Artificers should - or even can - use tech beyond the tech level of the setting.

2 years ago | 2  

@Driger1792

Miss your horror stories. Hope you return.

1 year ago | 1

@zacharysieg2305

I voted before watching the video, pleasantly surprised that DM picking feats for you is indeed when I would have jumped ship.

2 years ago | 1  

@malfolium

See, this is hard cuz I'm bad at writing backstories, so requiring me to write a 5-page one is an automatic nope. But even if the guy gave me leeway with that, the "DM picks your feats" is another automatic nope. I made the character, not the DM, so they don't get to pick my feats for me. So honestly, I have two choices here

2 years ago (edited) | 4  

@sarsapong

The dm who just ignore session zero and breach the consent agreement

2 years ago | 1

@mrskribble

5 pages is too much to make as a requirement, especially if the DM isn't going to use any of it.

2 years ago | 0

@phobiawitch835

Tough choice, honestly. A 5 in a stat is not great but I don’t mind a character with a flaw, especially if I can have an 18 somewhere else. 5 oage backstory CAN be excessive, but some people can write that. Banning Artificer is one thing (it doesn’t fit every setting after all), but banning bards is reaching the end of the rope, since that’s one of my top 3 classes. The moment you take control of picking my feats, I’m done. I’ve been there before and hated it. And that was pathfinder, not 5e, where it’s 10x worse since feats replace subclasses basically. I aint living that nightmare again!!!

2 years ago | 3  

@TrixyTrixter

Definitely feels like a me thing but the "highest 18, lowest 5" Rule actually sounds fine. tho id like to get to put them qhere i wish.

2 years ago | 1  

@axel4196

Why go through the trouble of writing a five-page backstory only for the DM to execute you when you piss him off? Oh, and I despise micromanagement. I choose my own feats.

2 years ago | 0

@realdragon

5 page backstory, even if I had level 20 character the best I could probably do is half page

2 years ago | 0

@emiledlund9559

Banning certain player options is not a sin. Not at all. But being inconsistent about it is

2 years ago | 2  

@destroyerinazuma96

We once had a Bard player roll a 3 and an 18 and average. So he dumped Str, bumped Cha by 2 and ran with it.

2 years ago | 0

@Deailon

Out of context, it would be at the DM interfering with character development. The story gives much stronger red flags early on. There is nothing inherently wrong with 'one stat as a principal strength and one as a weakness' character creation - many games do that (5 is a little low for D&D, though). As for backstory, I played both at the 'three sentences' and 'pages long' tables and either has its merits (I like to write a page or two, but as a GM I prefer bios that are short and to the point). Some restrictions on races and classes for the campaign reasons are ok (e.g. 'no clerics and paladins, as gods are dead and you will try to bring them back'). But that is all without the context this story provides.

2 years ago | 0