I once had a player in my game play a changeling who swapped places with someone, then forgot they were a changeling. So naturally, I had the rest of the party meet the original without her. That was a fun reveal.
I once had a player in my game play a changeling who swapped places with someone, then forgot they were a changeling. So naturally, I had the rest of the party meet the original without her. That was a fun reveal.
Why would a campaign not need a tabaxi journalist?
I was once explaining a rules lite system I wanted to try to someone, and he kept complaining about how difficult it would be for him to learn a new system. I had to point out that I had already fully explained the rules while we were talking, and we weren’t even talking long.
I think some people just think every system is as complex as D&D.
Dragon Age quote from Iron Bull: Some high-ranking women wear ornamental crap with tits hammered into it. One good shot, and all that cleavage gets knocked right into the sternum. Real messy. Good on you for going practical. …Leaves something to the imagination, too.
Then use your words and say “dude, stop” or “could you maybe turn it down?” If the DM let it go on and never did anything to stop it, then it’s the DM’s fault it got as far as it did. Just because someone else is a villain in the story doesn’t mean you’re not.
And this is in the hypothetical situation that the bard is the specific strange kind of person who learns of a possible gloryhole in a TTRPG and uses it without question.
All I see is a DM making a castration joke, which is a dick joke but more gruesome, while blaming a player for a situation entirely within the DM’s power to stop by any number of peaceful, less disruptive means. They could have spoken to them, but they chose to cut off their dick.
Glory Hole 3 is the lying mimic. However, while there is one mimic who lies, there is also the possibility that the remaining glory holes are honest mimics.
That only clears the first hurdle. It only lets the player recognise it as a gloryhole. But if you were to give someone a fleshlight in a public place, do you honestly expect them to use it right there? Or to even accept the fleshlight? Same applies with a gloryhole in a ttrpg. Even were they inclined, there are other people there.
And if everyone there is down for it, you’re now the asshole ruining everyone’s fun by putting chili in the fleshlight.
The DM clearly had a fantasy of the bard engaging in some perverted act, then thought of a way to punish the bard for the DM’s fantasies, and is now presenting it before the table and thinking it makes the bard look bad.
I want to point out that the player would need to identify it as a glory hole and not just a peephole or something. They would also need to think it’s a normal thing to find in the world and not something out of place. They would also need to be comfortable enough with the other players to engage in sexual roleplay with a wall. And in this case, you have clearly created a very perverse game world for your players.
The alternative is you just deciding to tell your players “you see a hole in a wall that you think could be a glory hole. …Anything you wanna do about that?” to which most players would either ignore it or check the hole for traps before ignoring it.
In short, I don’t think the problem is the BARD being horny here.
I feel like that campaign is just begging for Lolth to show up and just be like “I see you’ve done… well for yourself. Are you going to introduce me to your new friends or…?”
I do like the idea that elves just change their entire lifestyle every hundred years or so. They spend 80 years as a warrior, then decided to take up magic and became a wizard for the next 80 years.
I also like the idea of a human village that accidentally built 4 statues of the same elf who kept saving them with different skills.
I wrote it on a pc, then looked later using Jerboa and saw what you saw. Definitely a Jerboa issue.
Look, everyone knows that <previous thing> was much better than <current thing> because it was <comparator> and more <adjective>. Just look at how much <comparator> <element> became! They completely ruined it.
Fingers crossed this gets fixed in <next thing>.
Goblins have language and culture and religion, and that all requires the ability to think, feel and grow. Making them evil means that either your worldbuilding is nonsense or you’ve made a thinking, feeling group of people inherently evil from birth. If you want a group that doesn’t think, feel or grow, then do what I said in the first place and use undead.
Stop saying it’s an evil deity doing these things. It’s just you. You’re doing these things. Don’t be a coward.
Are you seriously trying to justify Boblin the Goblin being evil because of the Lich from Adventure time? One is the cosmic manifestation of the death of all things, and the other is short and green. That’s not remotely the same.
And most objectively evil villains in fiction are, I shall point out, human. Nothing to do with their species. A group of human bandits and a group of goblin bandits are equally evil. And at no point have you given any explanation as to why that wouldn’t be the case.
Either answer the fucking question or shut the fuck up.
Edit: It would appear they chose to shut the fuck up. I would have preferred they answer the question, but this is acceptable.
No, sorry, that still doesn’t answer my question.
Cosmically controlled goblins are doing the same thing as bandits, but the bandits made the choice to do evil things and the goblins didn’t get a chance to refuse. Surely, the people choosing to do evil are worse than those forced to do evil, right? So why are bandits better than goblins?
The suggestions you gave fall kinda flat to me, really. No matter what the in-universe reason is, the DM made the universe. “It’s what my character would do” doesn’t excuse bad behaviour, and neither does “it’s what my gods decided.” You’re the one who made them do that. You’re the one that decided an entire culture of thinking, feeling people are born objectively evil and can be killed en masse. And that’s fucked up.
I feel like this is related to the meme you just posted about turning an insect swarm spell into a cloud of falling elephants. That’s not “player shennanigans”, that’s theory-crafting a gotcha moment and failing because of how the spells actually work.
Everyone should play through all of it! Eluna and the Moth is amazing! Sunswallower’s Wake is amazing! A Walk in the Unlight is amazing! I may like this game just a little bit.
To everyone who never played it, Wildermyth is essentially a story focused, randomly generated fantasy X-COM. You play as a company of heroes crossing the wilderness and hunting down monsters, coming across all the fantastic things therein. Campaigns take in-game decades to finish, so the heroes you start with might retire and their kids might join the fight later on. It’s one of those games where I have run out of people irl to recommend it to, so now it’s your turn!
Try flipping your process. Instead of working from the full list and taking things out, start from an empty list and add stuff in. If there isn’t a good enough reason for it to be there, don’t put it in. And if this leaves you with just humans, that’s fine.
I’m not removing githyanki from my game. Githyanki were never in my game.
From Order of the Stick:
“Wait, aren’t dark elves evil?”
“Oh, my, no. Not since they became a player race. Now the entire species consists of Chaotic Good rebels, yearning to throw off the reputation of their evil kin.”
“Evil kin? Didn’t you just say they were all Chaotic Good?”
“Details.”
There’s a game called Wildermyth where every faction is inherently incompatible with humans, but none of them are inherently evil.
For example, the Gorgons are an empire seeking to reclaim lost territory. This is fair, but they’re aquatic, so they need to flood the world to take it back. Humans naturally need to fight them in order to survive, and there’s no real way to compromise on that. It doesn’t help that they ooze corruption everywhere they go.
Not even 1d4. It’s just 1 + STR, which is standard for an unarmed strike.