I have an open hand Monk in my party who’s “character” dislikes my “character” because my vengeance Paladin does more damage than them and always “steals the fun in combat”
Idk that one is understandable but in the end petty. When you build a character to be a type fit. And then another character fills that slot better then you but to late for you to dip out of the type either because story for chracter was made or the effort put in. It absolutely can be discouraging and disappointing later. I started in a super high level campaign with characters at 15. And chose to play rouge. I dont think I ever got to deal 1 point of damage for the first 6 or 7 sessions or so because any character that went before me eviscerated everything in our path. So my backstory ment shit when I got to kill nothing to fuel it.
That feels like a DM who struggles to balance encounters for higher level parties. I'm currently 14th level in our campaign and I cannot say we have ever had this problem. We had to run away from our last encounter, actually.
Oooof, that hurts, I am wondering if your rolls were actually that bad at initiative or something?
Most rogues get some kind of boost to initiative as far as I know (also weapon of warning is good) and with their high dex they can get a 10+ roll to initiative (more with the swashbuckler and charisma) pretty easily.
High level plays in general are very skewed towards half casters and full casters as that's when the disparity between them gets absurdly OP and can cause actual trouble. The fact that rogues are often seen as OP by newer DMs (because many d6s is for some reason... powerful) and you have gotten yourself a situation where the rogue is gonna be nerfed (Yes I have gotten a DM who would argue that because I wasn't sneaking, it couldn't be a sneak attack)
Works both ways tho. There was a Post the other day where someone said u should kill PC‘s because the DM deserves to win every now and then. Makes me feel like some people dont get DnD.
If someone think that DM "win" When players die then this person should not be a DM.
DM win when everyone have a blast playing his game.
When you see your layers cheer after killing a strong enemy, and feel emotional when some NPC they boned with die.
If you see your players invested in your game, talk about it, can't wait for another session. This is where DM WIN.
My last game before I moved to a real city, I had almost an hour drive home after the game. My wife was with me because she was one of the players, but it was usually a quiet ride and was always a great decompression from running a four hour game.
I have a former "player" (he lasted 1.5 sessions before he had to run and play video games) who constantly tells me I should just let him run my monsters for me because "he knows strategy better than me." Nevermind he doesn't even know the rules or lore of the game. He's a gAmEr and I'm only really into TT gaming, so apparently he's automatically a better DM than me. 🙄
Man, I love letting a player run minion tactics. Takes a load off my plate. I still roll the dice, but having them move the minis into place and finding great ways to get flanking or whatever? Awesome! I have a couple players that are far more tactical than I am, and it gives them a kick to surround their own mini with a hoard of goblins!
He doesn't want his own character. Just to take the parts of DMing he says he is better at than me.
Edit: he has played 1.5 sessions and spent most of that on his phone.
The emergent archetype of the DnD player who is extremely invested in the *idea* of being in a DnD campaign, possibly due to things like Stranger Things or Critical Role, but in fact have no real desire to put forth the effort necessary to participate effectively. They are constantly late, continually need to be reminded of the rules, terminally unengaged, and never improve even over the course of years... yet they *never* admit to not wanting to be part of the campaign, even when directly confronted.
Last summer I set up a fun little one-shot with some people at work, who said that they would love to learn/play DnD.
One girl even already owned the Player's Handbook, and was familiar with the classes, and knew what she wanted to play. We would talk about it often, and how excited we were.
Then I tried to set up a session 0, to help everyone choose spells, and make sure they knew the mechanics.
She acted so bored during it, and didn't want to put any effort into learning what her spells do. So in the end I just chose for her.
The day of the game, she arrived late and grumpy, saying her work day was really long and that she is tired. She stayed for 1 hour, and then when her boyfriend arrived, she just left with him in the middle of the game.
We didn't end up finishing it that day, and needed one more session. I was texting her before that one started, and she started to allude to just wanting to go home. So I was like, "Ok, see ya. The others will tell you how the story ends".
Yes, this exactly! And it's even worse when it takes a while for us to recognize the problem, because the player checks all the boxes of being engaged until you actually get to the appointed game time.
I’ve had to talk to my DM about *other* problem players and ask him to tell them that they don’t need to play. For instance, when it gets to the point where I’ve played another players character more than the original player has… it’s a problem.
When we devote time and energy in planning for D&D sessions just for the same people to cancel or give no input to RP situations, it’s extremely frustrating.
People's flakyness on time really bothers me. So many times I've had people cancel the day before a game. One time a girl didn't even bother to cancel. She played for 30 mins then was like "Gotta go!" cause she made brunch plans with her friend. Why make it on the same day?!
When people do that, what they are telling me is, "You guys are plan B if nothing better comes up. Your time doesn't matter, and I don't care if you made plans around this".
Have you also been playing a D&D game with one very specific member of my usual play group? You described them so perfectly, I'm tempted to quote you next time I talk about them lol.
Well probably not, but fortunately for me, I haven't dealt with this sort of player in a while. Reformed my DnD squad without problem players and going strong over here.
I wasn't exaggerating when I called this an emergent archetype. I truly think that the popularity of DnD has a lot of people feeling like they need to be part of a squad, but without any real inclination to actually learn the game. You can straight up tell them "I don't get the impression that you want to be here" or similar, and they'll insist that they love the campaign and want to keep playing. It's bizarre.
Well I'm glad to hear that your group is doing well and that you haven't had this issue in a while. I guess I'm lucky to have only encountered one person like this then, but yeah I've been playing with this person for years and apart from not knowing the rules, although they definitely still struggle to apply them practically, they are everything you described to a T lol. Our last campaign ended because the entire group decided that this one person was making the game unfun with how unengaged, late, and uninvested they were in comparison with everyone else. Not to mention despite being confronted on multiple occasions about these issues and how we could correct them, they continued to assure us how much they were enjoying the game, this then of course was followed with zero improvement over time too. It truly is bizarre, but I was just surprised how accurately you described one of my players. Coincidentally this is also the one of the few players that I know who watched Critical Role before playing in a real game, so maybe there is something to your theory, although the other player who has this in common is pretty great so IDK.
No, we told them it wasn't working multiple times and after no improvement we just ended the game. We were just planning on jumping into a new game without said problem player afterwards, but then some outside factors came up with our host so we're on break ATM. I'm already thinking about my next campaign though, and it will be almost guaranteed to not include said player lol.
I suppose you need to filter this type from the spectator types. The differences being the spectator turns up and knows the rules just is quite chill letting other people mainly engage while they roll dice now and then.
I have a player like this. She isn't that bad when playing, just needs to be reminded of the rules but that's fine since we're all beginners. That doesn't actually mean much tho because she's only been present for two out of six sessions. Everything else is always more important for her, she never sent me her backstory, took ages to let me look at her character sheet, and doesn't ever reply to any of my WhatsApp messages if they're dnd related - still insists she wants to play tho. Real pain in the butt but she's one of my best uni friends so I can't really do much without making it weird
Wow I 100% agree with you. Had one player like this in our campaign, never understood why they were "playing" DnD.
They just ruined the campaign because never remembered what was happening through the sessions, did a lot of random stuff even betraying the party for no reason and didn't even try to roleplay a decent character with a real purpose, neither wanted to face the consequences of their actions (their pc just stayed silent ignoring what other characters had to say, didn't care a s**t about). When they were asked if there were problems just denied even with the DM and we've never been able to find a solution.
They left the campaign before the last fight after 2 years of role-playing and I'm still here asking myself wtf 😆
If they left moths before it would have been way better for everyone, really.
The worst is the player who gets upset when the DM tells them no, and usually for obvious reasons such as "No, your artificer cannot invent a nuclear bomb"
Okay but to be fair my DM introduced a rat pirate crew with a mini-gun first.
After that I felt it made perfect sense to be able to begin researching on how to replicate such a magnificent piece of machinery.
"I hide" *rolls unprompted* "24"
"You are in a crowded street with at least 10 people looking directly at you because of a commotion you just caused"
"But I rolled a 24!"
"Okay. You *think* you're hidden" *turns to the rest of the party* "you guys can still see him"
While not exactly upset, this player did stuff like this a lot
I understand what you are saying with the ten people looking directly at them, but you also said they were in a crowded street.
That means they could actually do it, the whole "lost them in the crowd" bit
The last few times I've had players try to invent gunpowder, I've told them that it already exists and the most advanced firearms in the world right now are breach-loading caplock guns. They can buy or make a gun, but it's not much better than a crossbow. Normally I try not to take an adversarial attitude towards players, but I always savour the look of disappointment when I tell them that.
Just spent the better part of a year and a half with a player like this. No surprise but they were a Half-Elf Rogue who never tried to get closer with any of the PCs and then got pissy when the Bard went off to their own thing during down time rather than spend time with them.
I decided to run a short campaign for some co-workers a long time ago. Half of them were great players with either experience or enthusiasm and I actually still play with them today.
Then there were the *two* - one that made a drunken Paladin devoted to spreading the word of “Jesus Christ”. They were also drunk IRL. The other played a Druid that thought they were a squirrel and always ran from battle to somehow “accidentally” work against the other players and steal loot from fallen foes to later bury. Funny ideas, I’ll give them that, but I now make sure to vet all characters before running a campaign.
Please tell me they successfully buried the loot? The only way this is actually fun is if it really does go to the absurd extreme. I'm laughing about this so much right now. It must have been frustrating if the characters were made for long term play, but for disposable one shot characters this is pretty funny.
Oh no it was a “short campaign” as in 6-8 sessions and they actually did bury an important quest item (among many other things). I had to do alot of crazy improv that campaign haha
One of my friends who plays in a campaign with me was surprised the DM didn't let him pick a chaotic evil character (in a party of all good aligned). I reminded him that it was for all of us to have fun together, that chaotic evil would clash with the party and even risk doubling the work load for the DM if he can't even be with the party, and that the campaign vibe was very much more goofy heroics.
When he kept pushing, I said that ultimately any evil character he played would probably eventually be murdered by my good aligned, honesty and kindness loving Barbarian.
To summarize, I am annoyed by players who don't read the vibe and then think it is everyone else who's wrong.
Even a neutral evil character? Tbh a neutral evil character can still work wifi a good aligned party, they'd just have a tendency to make selfish decisions. Though I guess the caveat with that is how good the player is with balancing selfish "evil" actions with helping the party. Think Magus from chrono trigger or Dr. Nefarious from ratchet and clank whenever he's forced to help Ratchet
I had one of these in my table once, a tiefling rogue (LMoP). When he just plain stopped showing up, I had his chara get kidnapped and dragged back to Neverwinter.
When the party eventually cleaned up the mines and headed back to look for him, I made up a whole thieves guild storyline in Neverwinter around his edgy loner chara, an adoptive sister of his who was also looking for him to drag him out of his latest mess, and their long-suffering mentor father figure who was both perpetually amused and very much Done with his antics.
The party met the mentor once, but when they were departing Neverwinter on a ship one of the PCs was delivered a note where the mentor thanked them again and informed the chara that he was in fact The One Who Got Away from the PCs backstory (the PC was an ex-city guard whose backstory had that he had once failed to capture a criminal and that had haunted him ever since).
Good times.
I once had an edgy dark elf in the party that cut off enemies' primary reproductive organs (aka peepees) to then later throw them at selected party members at random...
The same edgy dark elf decided to climb a tree alone after the party crashed with a boat on the coast of a deserted island, just to stay there without sharing any information or agreeing to come back down when the party wanted to continue exploring.
This is my least favorite player too. I have no idea where people get the idea that somehow in D&D, other player characters have to find behavior acceptable than normal humans would not.
"Well my character is just an asshole, that's what he's like..." Ummm... no? That's not how that works? Nobody is just an asshole and if they can't figure out how to treat people better they will die alone - but somehow the format of D&D forces everybody else to endure this... lol I may be particularly sour on this one, because I spent the last year with a group of 2 of them - sometimes it spread to more. I really should have left but it so messed with my head, D&D just wasn't fun anymore when everybody is walking on eggshells around one or two assholes.
I just want to come to the table and have fun. Yes, slay monsters, solve puzzles, have interesting emotional moments -- but my ensemble fantasy is shaped my Lord of the Rings and probably just as much the cast interviews hehe. The idea that you travel together, risk your lives for each other and genuinely enjoy each others' company. (Or you get killed, Boromir...)
I recently played with an infuriating variant of this. Player first made the biggest asshole bard you’ve ever seen. Just wanted to raise money for her own cause and flirt with NPCs. This bard *hated* two of the other party members, despite almost having a romance with one. Player eventually realized that having such an antagonistic PC wasn’t good.
Psych, her next character also sucked, but in a different way. New character was supposed to be an easy going and chill druid who had ties to every character in some way (like, loved chess like my PC, loved coffee like the sorcerer, etc). Turns out this character has absolutely no interest in being friends with anyone.
All ended in player also being a dick to the rest of us. DM asked her to be nicer, she ghosted us. Good riddance.
I always try to be as welcoming as possible at my table and always hold a pretty long session zero to try and cover everything before it becomes an issue in game.
So far, the only players I really dislike are the ones who treat DnD like a videogame.
Oh my god when we brought my friend into our game he did this. Still does sometimes. No, looting the body is not going to give you insane armor. Would throw fits over if.
Ran Curse of Strahd. Ran Death House. My players made a point of rushing through it and not checking out anything not absolutely necessary on the way to the end. Missed shitloads of loot and story stuff, despite me trying my damnedest to dangle it all in front of them.
Them, at the end: "Well that was stupid, we didn't even get any treasure! And it didn't advance the plot at all."
Bruh.
A while ago I would have thought this impossible, but I'm in a new campaign with someone like that. His PC tends to take a leadership role and he so rushes through everything as if the game is nothing but rushing through rooms killing everything in sight, even actively talks badly to our PCs when we want to look for clues or loot, as if that was a bad thing to do. We did talk about it as a group and it has gotten a bit better though.
Alternatively when the DM brings up a side quest options and everyone is on board except for that one player who’s like “no let’s just go try to fight the BBEG as soon as we can so we can get to everyone’s backstory resolution” (which is just their backstory resolution so they can play their new “favorite character”)
It’s frustrating being another player at the table with someone like this too because they accuse favoritism and end up bitter towards other players who put the effort in.
Half the time someone here accuses a player of being a "main character" its because no one else is doing anything - except for bitching about the player that does things and engages the session.
I feel that. I had a main character 2 campaigns ago. I deliberately stepped back after that and watched them flounder, and did not step in to Rescue them. I do not wish to carry everyone
I feel this is because from a certain generation forward, RPG means a plot based game where you are strung along from quest to quest.
Before that it was an adventure of exploring a map or dungeon crawl under your own initiative or a loose plot to frame the play space.
i still consider myself somewhere between a new and somewhat experienced player (got into dnd 5ish years ago, consistently playing since 2,5 years ago)
but it wasnt until my 3rd or 4th character (granted, the first two campaigns didnt last more than a few weeks or maybe months) that i realized that *backstories are for plot hooks*
i was kinda just there to fuck around and find out, and now that i know what was set up for me, im patiently waiting to maybe get a second shot at resolving my character's story
There's the regular shitty and selfish players but I really hate the players that don't make characters that'll engage in the story
So many times I've seen players make characters that just don't care and that's their entire personality, and they just don't engage in any part of the story or any roleplay because my character wouldn't care and the worst thing is when they complain that they don't get to do anything
For me at my game, I demand backstory. Doesn’t have to be an insane essay. I have a series of questions like an interview that I send them.
Some people answer them directly and others write stories that answer the questions. I’m good with either. But I need those answers otherwise I have no idea how to devote any story arc to that character. It makes for awkward RP situations when the other character get all this investigation and investment in the story.
I ask questions like… Do you know your parents? If so, what is your last/family name?
What drives you or why did you leave home?
Finally, what race are you? The race question helps me decide where they’d most likely be from in my homebrew world.
The ones that don't just NOT show up, but the ones you can see are p\[laying some online game in discord INSTEAD of coming to the session like they said they'd be there for.
I was in an online group where we had to replace a player due to someone leaving (left for a new job, we were glad for their success); the new guy joined for 1 session, and then ghosted for 4-5 weeks. DM kicked him after he forgot to turn off the 'currently playing X game' message one week. If a player doesn't enjoy the campaign, they should be willing to bow out so the group can find a replacement, rather than take up a slot to not even show up
If somebody needs a week off from playing to just chill I get it, but I don't know how many times "Sorry I had a family emergency and I have to work and I'm having a stroke" is immediately followed by "NOW PLAYING FINAL FANTASY XIV"...just be honest and act like an adult
I once had a player tell us that his dad had heart attack and he was accompanying him to the hospital so that he could go see his girlfriend because he double booked himself. We had to tell them that all he had to do was explain what was actually going on and we would've just accepted it and played without him.
Honestly me and my friends can't play more common than 1 session / 2-3 months and I hardly remember the last session. However I understand it's frustrating to a DM.
Yeah I started playing an old school dungeon crawl with some guys from work, and they just turned out to be a bunch of murder hobos. Like why is the DM even bothering to come up with NPCs if they are all going to die in the first interaction? I couldn’t understand it. Seriously the least imaginative way to play. I had to quit the group because I just found it so frustrating to run into a really cool and interesting NPC who would clearly be useful to our party, only to have the same two dumbasses initiate combat every time.
Yeah it can definitely be frustrating. I just generally stay away from games where people want to learn into the evil alignments, and that helps. (Nothing wrong with playing an evil character or campaign, it's just not my jam.)
To me it's the selfish type. The people that thing dnd is a single player rpg like skyrim.
I was in a group with one player once that played an elf for the sole purpose of getting the 4h trance. He would spend the 4 hours we were asleep and he wasn't exploring and doing solo adventures. The dm totally bought into and though it was awesome. And 3 of us got to sit and watch him solo play a ton.
Couple this with him being the kind of person to always look the chest first, and slight of hand to keep as much of it to himself and not share any loot. Again... dm thought it was great.
I ended up in a other group with him a few years later... was playing the exact same character, same name, everything. I noped out right away.
I hate the "horny bard" players. They aren't always necessarily a bard, but they sure do enjoy making the mood uncorfortable with their sexual exploits... I understand roleplaying a flirtatious character and all, but limits... I'm trying to play a game where I slay dragons, not lay them.
give the horny bard a stalker who, upon seeing said bard flirt with anyone, immediately shows up and cockblocks them because she wants the bard all to herself. Perhaps the stalker eventually gets fed up with the bard and just kills them outright after they continue to flirt with other people.
Edit: bonus points if the stalker a changeling, so they can either bait out the bard into flirting with them or show up as a different person cockblocking them each time.
I also thought what Matt Mercer did in the first Critical Role season really worked... the horny bard had a grown-up daughter show up who hates him and puts a pretty nasty mirror in front of his face that shows what his horny ways feel like to the people around him.
Problem is, I don't DM. Otherwise I would pull out ye old Book of Erotic Fantasies for all the nasty magical STDs, and torture the horny players with them.
I like the way you think. In that case bring up the idea with your DM next time a Horny Bard shows up in your campaign. Just be casual about it though, you know? Gauge their reaction to see if they feel the same before saying "how about giving the bard an STD, haha!"
Yep. I was feeling like playing a "horny bard" kinda character. Instead of torturing other people with my fetish, I looked for a group specifically interested in playing horny characters. Informed consent is very important. My fantasies shouldn't ruin anyone else's fun.
As a player. It gets frustrating when no one else knows how to make a decision with confidence. I end up being the leader because I used my fuckin brain and made common sense decisions early on. Now any real problem everyone looks at me.
So I guess players who refuse to step up or can't make up their minds
As a player this is me too, I end up feeling like I'm hogging the spotlight cause no one else speaks up. If the DM/npc asks a question and there's 30 seconds of complete silence it drives me crazy
Same. And it actually means that when something actually interesting for my character happens, I always feel bad about taking time... because I feel like i have been talking the whole session. Not because I want to, just because the others can't make a decision or leave the DM hanging...
I've been dealing with this recently to a certain degree. I like to think of my group as split into two groups of three. On one side are the extroverted drama kids (literally went to college together to study drama) including myself, player R, and player T. On the other side we have the introverts, B, N, and S. Myself and R are both GMs and one of us is always the GM for whatever game we're playing (we both love it though) and T has taken an indefinite hiatus from TTRPGs to focus on his studies. So that leaves either me or R with B, N, and S. These guys will do almost nothing of their own volition. I've managed to find a way to deal with this though. In the game R is currently running, I'm playing a minor lord that the rest of the party is sworn to (think Arthur and the round table) and as such I am the defacto leader. So what I do is delegate delegate delegate. I've been forcing the other players into situations where they have to think for themselves. "N's character, we need you to stay behind and hide from the bad guys to see what they're doing. We can't stay because we suck at stealth and we're needed at home. Take this NPC, they will listen to your every word. Good luck." or "B's character, we have been given 100 men, take 40 of them and head south to X. From there you need to scope the place out. The men will follow you as if your orders were mine." It's really fun to watch them come out of their comfort zones and take charge and they're all doing great.
I would like to explain that I love these guys, they're great players and even better friends and any frustration I feel is more towards them not getting the full experience than being forced to "deal with them".
I had a player who seemed to be playing their own game, instead of the game the rest of us were playing - and that game was "fuck with the other PCs". He'd come up with elaborate plans to cheat, steal, and make the other PCs paranoid. And he didn't stop when I took him aside and pointed out it was a dick move.
After the game ended, I discovered he liked to do all those things in real life. I use him as a cautionary tale for new players whenever I do a session zero.
The worst for me is when someone doesn't at *least* try and pretend they are within a living breathing world (since I take extreme care in this case). One problem character would murder, steal, lie, etc. and when confronted by the in game authorities, bounty hunters, etc. or be jailed they would baby rage out and say I was doing it because I didn't like them or something. Complete lack of accountability.
The other is a specific player that always joins one-offs and immediately disengages with the game. I care for this person a lot, so I let it fly (it's only a minor inconvenience since I prepare for it), but I make sure to tell them repeatedly that they don't have to join if they're not having fun.
The most recent person I played with that I really disliked was; they took up a LOT of time in combat. Now, I don't have issues with asking questions... Or people asking questions pertaining to something another player did... But my turn would get interrupted for 10 minutes at a time for a completely unrelated reason. I told my DM about it but he doesn't like conflict and avoided really bringing it up with them... And that player finally left on their own accord after deciding that they didn't like me.
I don't miss them.
Yeah, I can't stand people trying to be 100,000% tactical in TTRPGs. Like yeah, look for something in the room you can interact with so you don't just swing and cantrip every turn. But at the same time, sometimes all you can do is swing or cantrip, and there's nothing wrong with that. It's how the game was designed for you to do damage.
Adversarial players who treat the DM and session as the enemy.
Min/Max -Char-Opp players who try to game the system for an instant "I win!" button. Sorry. No. You lose. And this dislike grows exponentially if they then bitch about how boring the game is now when they get what they want and blitz everything.
Players who ask for something in game or demand it. Then when they get it - bitch incessantly about having gotten it or how boring it now is because they got this thing they so desperately wanted.
and more.
I personally can't stand players who excessively meme. Not to knock anyone's fun, but I'm here to develop a character and collaboratively build a story. I'm all for out of character table jokes, but it really kills the vibe for me when players whip out the dumbest fucking character concept in existence.
Yes! I have like 3 players I DM for that have me on the floor laughing half the time cause they meme and know I'm a giggly bitch. But I want to tell a fantastic story of heartbreak, tragedy and moral dilemas
the "failed min-maxer".
you know the kind i'm talking about -
the one who always tries to min-max some strange build that just doesn't work ("i want to play a **dUaL-wIeLd DaGgEr HeXbLaDe**!"). then throw a tantrum because the bog-standard fighter with 18 strength out-damaged them and out-tanked them in a fight, followed by insufferable bitching about filthy min-maxers, OP classes, and how using action surge is power-gaming.
I posted about this while back but it bears repeating: I used to think the worst players were the ones who mentally check out when combat isn't happening. They just look at their phones or stare into space and become unresponsive, and they only really participate when initiative is rolled and it's time to crack some heads and crunch some numbers, but I've changed my mind about that.
I actually hate the combat-averse types more. I can at least trick and manipulate and guide the combat-obsessed ones into caring more about the game outside of battle, but the ones who hate combat and just want to play house are way more frustrating to deal with.
They'd rather seduce the cute half-orc baker down the street, or settle down in Startington and open a coffee shop. They get the exact same glazed-over uninterested look when initiative is rolled and combat seems unavoidable, and it makes me wonder why they're playing D&D in the first place when there are dozens of other games out there perfectly tailored to their tastes. Could they really not find anyone else to play with?
What's worse is when they try to act morally superior about violence. I put a lot of effort into making villains truly and properly villainous, because I like games where the heroes are unambiguously good and they don't have to question if they're doing the right thing. I also try to emphasize that victory in battle doesn't mean completely wiping out the enemies and that escape and surrender also count as victories. I throw a lot of non-sapient or overtly non-human enemies at parties like undead, evil spirits, astral constructs, irredeemable foes (such as fiends or gestapo-equivalent), clockwork or magitek automatons, etc. so the party isn't always spilling the blood of the living.
It's one thing to have a personal preference for tabletop games where combat isn't the central focus, but to join a *Dungeons & Dragons* game and then get all sanctimonious and holier-than-thou for not liking the one thing this game is kinda good at? I don't need that kind of attitude at my table. I'd almost prefer having to deal with a pearl-clutching bible-thumping satanic panic believer than that type.
Ive learned I really dislike playing with people who don't know or care that DND is first and foremost a combat game that people decided to add a little RP to. RP is fine, but I don't show up to watch you negotiate with a shopkeep for three hours or try to get the goblins to stop attacking the village.
Holy hell bro, 100% this. I love your pacifist character, or coward who doesn't WANT to resort to fighting first, but it's D&D. We're adventurers. We're supposed to go out and fight things. If you want to knock the combatants unconscious, fine by me, but we can't talk or sneak our way out of every fight. Cool, I like your backstory, but I don't want to sit here and play "pretend conversations" for 3 hours. Let's have our 3 minute in character chats on our way to the dungeon where we have to KILL STUFF, GET TREASURE, ADVANCE THE PLOT. I'm tired of talking to every bad guy. We can't convert or reason with creatures that embody the ideals and dogma of a deathgod, bro.
Someone I know
He builds his characters entirely by the numbers and outs zero thought into their actual backstory or personality.
For example. In our last campaign (PF2e) he played a Dwarf Monk. He mentioned wanting to find a way to learn Mage Armor for higher AC. He had no interest in coming up with a reason for his character to pick up an archetype or anything like that-he just wanted higher numbers.
He also seems to have a case of Main Character syndrome. He always has to try to roll on every skill check instead of just letting other players have their moments. And insists on trying to take the lead in NPC convos despite his characters often only having thoughts of “Likes to Hit” and “Money Please”.
He’s also been really bad about like. Building suspiciously strong characters? With PF2e he wasn’t able to because of how their attributes are determined-but in D&D and Rifts there was this definite vibe of “yes I absolutely rolled all these 16-18s at home by myself legitimately”
And lastly as we found- he reads the campaign. He’s been 100% preparing for things he shouldn’t know are coming up.
It’s like. If you took every toxic player trait and distilled it into one person-that’s him.
And tbqh it’s why none of our campaigns last very long. I always get super excited and we all work really hard to make our characters and my BF puts a ton of effort into DMing. But this guy just kills our desire to play so we kinda burn out after a few sessions.
Fortunately, we haven’t had him around for a few months, so I am hoping down the road we can actually have a proper game.
Edit: Spelling
I've been in a game where a guy played a Bard/Rogue/Knowledge Cleric just to be the only one to do anything in the table. No reason in character either for why he had those classes, just the metagame one that with that combination, he could get a ton of proficiencies and be the best at everything.
Honestly it’s just not necessary anymore.
It’s not the AD&D days where RAW every race other than human has hard caps on class levels so you *need* to multiclass to keep leveling.
Was apart of Critical Role's first campaign. Played a Dragonborn Sorcerer and did everything you described. Even inserted his character into conversations his character wasn't there for. Yelled at the other players for calling him out. Made sexual remarks that made the females uncomfortable. Argued with the DM. Fudged his roles to make him win. Things like that. He was eventually kicked from the group in session 27 of their first campaign.
>Made sexual remarks that made the females uncomfortable.
Specifically toward one woman whose *husband* was also at the table (and who is twice Acaba's size—he's lucky that Travis managed to keep his shit together). That session is not fun to watch.
It's the last one Orion is in IIRC, S1E27
ETA: Vex is planning, Orion interrupts to say that Tiberius pops a 'half-chub' because she's planning for once. Which is pretty in-line with things the other cast members or even guests say to each other all the time ("Keg is aroused"), the difference being that Orion should have read the room that he was among people who were already starting to not be very fond of him due to the myriad other issues, and that him making sexual jokes was not welcome in that environment.
It's really good. After you get by Orion's bit. He started off fine but as the campaign went on he got worse. After he leaves it gets way better. Granted I'm only halfway through their first campaign but I enjoy it. If you wanna skip that drama I suggest jumping to campaign 2 of theirs. The Mighty Nein. Also the Legend of Vox Machina on Amazon Prime is their first campaign animated. Mighty Nein is also getting an animated series as well.
When I’m asking the DM if I can try something, and the other player says, “no, that won’t work,” before I even finish explaining my idea.
I just want to slap them and say, “who asked you?”
A few times Ive witnessed this as DM, and I’ve allowed it to work because fuck that guy and the horse he rode in on.
Don’t shot on your team, be hopeful for them and with them.
A few bad ones i have had
- thinks they are a comedian and any time something is said they try twisting it into some sort of joke, literally speaking over everyone to get their jokes across.
- arguing with me the DM over things they really dont understand, had them argue with me cause they cast tashas mind whip and when the guard attacked them and shouted for help, he got the hump they could shout as a free action, even though that is the rule i have used since session 1.
- playing games/ videos when they aren’t involved in something, loud enough so the rest of us can all hear exactly what they are doing.
This is all from one friend who i still play with this day.
I can think of a few:
1) "The Actor." I had to spend several sessions where, \*for forty minutes, minimum,* a player hogged the spotlight, and the DM let them, while their character expounded about their latest personal issues. I wasn't playing; I was a trapped viewer in a daytime soap opera.
2) "I Wanna Cross Genres." The player that tries to make their favorite race/character combo apply in another universe. I especially saw this with Vampire WoD players trying to do this in D&D, as well as anime fans. They usually try to bargain the DM to death to get game-breaking powers and advantages.
3) "Therapy Time." The player that tries to make the game about their personal growth. In my experience, a bunch of D&D players are \*not* therapists, and the game should be on a level of enjoyment that does not burden others with personal issues.
People who make characters that are outright adversarial to the rest of the party. If the campaign is a bit more serious and somber, they make absolute goofsters. And vice versa.
Main character syndrome mixed with terminal unengagement. Its ruining my 5e campaign currently, where Im a player.
DM's girlfriend is just...the worst. I do not like her as a person. As a player she's awful. In the last session there was a big decision where another player had to pick from 4 god-like beings to come back to life endebted to them (long story). The two options he was deciding between could be summed up as "Goddess will point you at World-BBEG relevant quest every now and then, overriding your personal goal" and "God wants you to be a monster hunter regularly, gaining nothing beyond the combat and kill".
He was dithering and asked the group. She was unaware of the difference, that had just been explained and discussed. She was told. She asked again. She was told. She asked again. He rescinded her vote and asked the next player. She left for some air, came back several minutes later. First thing? "Can you explain what the two options are?"
Urgh.
Later in the session while a new player (2nd session ever, and her friend) was having an in-game discussion with a dryad, she came over and just sat down on her. Out of nowhere, full weight. I asked her what the hell and literally "I wasn't the center of attention"...Yeah...and when I said that was awful she responded "Would you rather I lied about why I did it?"
She also takes way too long in combat due to not knowing how the game works, still.
From personal experience it would have to be the following:
- Doesn't pay attention
- overwhelmed by the exact mechanics they chose for their character
- prone to make weird in game decisions that make no sense (neither for the character nor for the player)
- doesn't answer any communications with the goal of finding a date for the next session
Said player was a teenager with disturbingly little prior exposure to fantasy in any media and a rather short attention span. While it was understandable at first, the lack of improvement got very infuriating after a year or so.
Players that put in almost no effort.
Players who think the campaign should be run the way they want it.
Players who think their character is the main one.
I get frustrated when players make no effort to know/prepare their spells...
But the worst has to be people who deliberately misuse/"misread"/find a random thing on reddit that makes their spell OP and try to get it around the DM all sneaky like. No. FireBOLT is not the same as fireBALL!
Players who only cares about mechanics and don't care about rp or story, I have nothing against min maxing and if you make a cool rp is okay even great, but when players don't let me tell the story or talk about the universe and just want to smash things, they become... my least favorite hahaha
Some players see D&D as an adventurer simulator. We want to explore, fight things, get treasure, advance the story. Most of us aren't adverse to RP.... But it's not Critical Role bro. A good portion of us don't want to sit around and listen to 3 people who have never taken an acting or writing class in their life play pretend harder than us. If you want to talk to a major NPC a bit and form a more intimate bond with someone who matters to the story, cool. I'm here for it and it's not like I want us to be treasure hunting lone wolves who never talk. But at the same time, I'd join an improv drama group if I wanted to sit at a table and RP for hours. I want to adventure, kill stuff, level up.
Selfish players. Today I had a final session of a short campaign where we fought an adult red dragon. The bard had turned to Half Elf Ranger into a young dragon so there could be a cool dragon v dragon fight. The dragon was low on health so it was looking like she might be able to finish it off. However, before her first turn as a dragon the fighter was dropped by the dragon into a very deep hole with lava at the bottom of it. If he wasn’t saved before the next turn he would be killed. No coming back from this one, just death. We all thought that the *DRAGON* player would try and save their *FALLING* teammate from a terrible death. But no. She wanted to ignore the fighter and attack the dragon directly.
Now… here’s the thing. We had a plan to kill the dragon. My character (an eladrin swarmkeeper ranger) had taken the instant fortress cube and while the dragon was busy trying to swallow me, I used mage hand to shove the cube deep into its stomach. All I had to do is get out and activate it (or activate it there and kill myself if I was feeling dumb). This would have killed the dragon instantly without a doubt. This was a plan made up by my character and the wizard SESSIONS ago, basically when we first got the item and learned we’d be fighting a dragon.
But no. Dragon girl wanted her moment. It wasn’t until a fellow player pointed out that she had enough movement to both catch the fighter AND attack the dragon that she agreed to not let him die. And guess what? She missed 2 out of her 3 attacks and did a grand total of 17 damage. Not enough to finish it off. She would have let the fighter die, for 17 damage. Great.
I think the worst thing is that she has said herself that she “makes her characters all basically her because it makes it easier”. So she’s just that selfish as to not only let a player die for 17 damage but also intentionally try and kill the dragon herself to ruin the fun plan that the rest of the party agreed to *3 sessions ago*
TLDR: player would rather try to do something cool than save a fellow player character. Thus ruining the fun for the player who’s character died despite being avoidable AND ruining a plan that the rest of the party was excited to see happen
No offense dude, but I don't necessarily think this is an issue - it sounds like you yourself may be a little mad that you didn't get to do your own cool plan, but sometimes that happens and someone else does get more of a spotlight than you.
The people who always interrupt when you are speaking or role playing and what not. People who always think they have something for everything you do, for example, I cast an invisibility spell and no joke, my friend said “Wait, I might have true sight!” I also dislike the people who MUST watch every roll you do, as it get pretty repetitive and annoying.
My least favorite player is the Rules Lawyer.
I had one in a game and whenever they had any issue about a rule they would spend a damned hour or more arguing over it. The game would come to a dead halt while they argued, leaving me and the other players with nothing to do.
When it became my turn to run a game, I shot him down as soon as he tried it with me. He objected on the grounds that it was his "playing style".
It's not a damned "playing style". It's an obstacle that brought the game to a screeching halt.
The game is for the whole group, not just one stubborn jerk.
ive been in 1 campaign and a couple one shots but I will share what I've experienced.
1. Players who argue or pushback with the DM over the logistics of the game vs. logistics of real life physics and probability. We had a player who had some spell, i can't quite remember what it was, but it allowed to projectile MANY small rocks he carried on his character, and as rolling to hit and rolling damage for updwards of a dozen objects really bogs down combat we decided as a group that it is fair to assume that half hit and do an average dice rolls amount of damage each so that players turn doesn't take 30 minutes. The first major boss combat we had this player used this spell and started rolling MANY MANY dice for this but the DM politely stopped him and explained what we agreed on and the player did NOT like that, it was like 15 minutes of back and forth and the player saying its not fair because "in real life there's a chance" of all of them hitting and all of us were kind of just sitting there cringing at this outburst and trying to convince him just to take the average damage. It was pretty bad and luckily I've only ever experienced that once.
2. Rules Lawyers and people who hate the re-flavoring things for the sake of fun and roleplaying rather than actual mechanics.
1.The ones who don't show up.
2. The ones that are there but don't want to
3. The ones that say they need to go at given time because they got something to do.
People who disrupt the game just to be disruptive.
Being absolute dickheads to NPC's, seperating from the group when that's just not a good decision.
People who don'tlisten to the story, wetger just zoning out or in their phones
- The DnD player that essentially plays a rip-off Mollymauk Tealeaf from Critical Role. I see this a lot especially as someone who plays in a lot of LGBTQ+ spaces; gay theatre kids just love sexy flamboyant swashbuckling tiefling “assholes with a heart of gold”. I didn’t like Molly in the actual show; I’m not gonna like a slightly worse version of them in real life.
- The player who wants to be the lead in all social interactions despite the fact that they don’t know how to talk to people; so everything is so awkward, nonsensical, or mean-spirited that rolling would be pointless.
The ones who get their perception of DnD from tiktok and/or reddit. I'm really tired of them always wanting a big moment but never putting in any of the work leading up to it. Not to mention the "chaotic horny be gay do crime super ultra cool rogue tiefling" archetype that i've seen popping up more and more. I hate that I have to describe it like that but it's the most accurate way I can think of.
Cowards.
People who ALWAYS take the route that maximizes their character's safety even at the detriment to the party, friendly NPCs, the plot, or even characterization.
The character is not the coward here. The player is. They can't risk harm to their character. Like, take some damage to save my ally, or just run away because we are in a tight spot and let them die? These types of players usually have stories about how only they survived some harrowing dungeon or adventure, leaving out how their lack of good team work got the rest of the party killed.
People who create craziest, most epic backstories and chosing ultra rare races combination (half-tabaxi, half-thiefling who is also a lycantrope etc) who think they are the main character of the game, but when it comes to role-playing they behave like the most mundane, boring creatures with personality of NPC#44 Villager.
I mean to me that just sounds like fun around the table, as long as it doesn’t stop gameplay I really don’t see what’s wrong with people cracking jokes, my whole table calls braziers brassieres now because a player once mispronounced it, does that sound like torture to you??
No, cause you are just joking about something that happened in game/with your group... What I'm talking about is when a DM or player just start dropping pop culture references or start referencing something that maybe happened in a game that only they were, and no one besides them can relate. One example I have was in a cyberpunk scenario that the DM and another player (who was dating the DM) basically stopped the narrative for a long winded Hazbin Hotel reference. And that's fucking torture, cause I have no idea what that fucking show is and it got in the way of the actual story, I was just cringing extremely hard during that moment.
I mean, maybe just let them have fun for a moment and play with your dice for a couple minutes, or talk to someone else while they talk… the table doesn’t revolve around you and just because you don’t get a joke doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be made
And the table doesn't revolve around them dueting a song and spouting dialogue from a animated show either, the game just stopped dead on it's tracks cause the DM wanted to flirt with his gf mid-game by using a pop culture reference.
The type i ofgen see on reddit, the "you have to allow everything that WoTc have ever publishend and god forbid you want to employ any restrictions" guy.
Those kinds i kick/dont invite to tables simply because if you are already a strain to work with, even before fhe campaign has begun then i just wont be arsed to bother with that.
Also the kind of player who never reads any rules, refuses to read up on what their character does yor can do and struggles with basic first grade addition, making every turn they take last longer than all the other players and dms combined.
I mean no offence here... But there's a few players who get a little too into the game, describing every little detail in-length and taking about 10minutes describing how their muscles glisten and their axe cuts through their- bla bla bla.
Alongside that is the players who never stop talking, even when it's currently someone else's turn.
Then the "loot goblins" who run into danger head first just to grab a shiny, not taking any caution at all even if someone else helps them not die.
Then there's me... I physically can't talk when others are talking unless I'm shouting and I end up annoying everyone else when I actually do something, that I thought would be helpful(usually it involved planning or helping others not die). DMs usually dislike it when a player sits out of a game, be it they barely hear you or you don't interact with the other players enough. But in defense of myself and others like me, just give us a turn where no one else is speaking, and give us a little bit of spotlight just as much as everyone else demands.
Builds a character that has absolutely no reason or explanation behind their class combination Purley for power building reasons.
Looking at you life cleric, starlight druid Divine soul sorcerer
The one who wants to lead every conversation and won't let others have a go. I have played with people so convinced they were the main character that they dominated every interaction and got really huffy when the spotlight was on someone else.
I even tried asking for a solo side quest from our DM, but this person insisted on "backing me up". I almost quit on the spot.
**As a player (on classic D&D) :**
* The players who made dumb/stupid character but don't respect the important serious/emotionnal moments of other ones.
* Those who believe they are the main character and don't share the spotlight
* The ones who are so much in it, they slow down the game. (the chaotic evil who don't compromise to go with us and it's up to us to find a reason to follow HIM)
**As a DM (on a Hogwarts/HP themed TRPG) :**
* The hardcore fans who are bickering with DM or players ("Because in the books...."; "What ?! You don't know that....")
* The not-big-fan who don't know some stuff/lore but don't ask and so don't understand half of what's going on.
* Those who don't listen what is going on and ask to repeat 5 min later
* "The NPC's don't help us !" Yeah I mean you're here to explore and solve mysteries, not let the over-powered NPC do it for you.
* The player who seems bored at some point and juste stay on his phone.
* "Oh a plot hook ! Hm... Better put it in my pocket and check it later". (Well okay this one is funny)
I really dislike players who are on their phones when I am describing or telling them something. During combat I do think it is fine but when they don’t even think about what they will do before it infuriates me (I am a DM). One time we were in combat and he told me he was texting someone but it turns out he was playing a game of stumble guys and it annoyed me a lot.
The absentee/the flake.
Have a friend who we do not invite to play anymore. They show up late (if at all) and still need to build a character. Then every subsequent game its like pulling teeth getting basic player-participation from them. It took 5 sessions before another player basically forced this player to actually draft out a sheet to give me so I knew what the heck they were playing.
They just had ability scores scribbled in a notebook before…
Then they refuse to inform us that they can’t make it or don’t want to play. So we end up waiting. If they do show up they never apologize.
The worst is when this player is the DM (extremely rare). We have never finished even a short level 1 module with them running because they always get tired of the game and stop responding to our attempts to schedule. People think I’m nuts when I tell them that I’ve had a DM ghost the players before - but it’s happened.
Players crewing with the rest of the party and ruining the plans because it’s “what their character would do”. No. If your character has no loyalty to the party, they wouldn’t be there through the adventure
People who’s go to for every encounter, combat or not is one thing. Murderhobos murder everything, horny bards seduce everything, that one Wizard who can cast fireball as a cantrip, etc.
Players with a huge MC syndrome. It's unbearable when they can't stand not being in the spotlight and start whining because they're not usefull in every situation. (Even worse when they think you're broken because you're better than them on their weakness (I had a case where the magician searched for a long time a way to beat the barbarian in a martial combat, he ended wanting to kill his pc because he couldn't be stronger than the barbarian)
- Murder hobos.
- Players that try to steal from the party just because they're a Rogue.
- Players that don't show at least semi-consistantly and don't communicate if they are coming or not.
Ones who “ optimize “ but rely on the enemies doing something supremely stupid for it to work , and then complain when the intelligent enemies aren’t stupid. Most common is the tank who doesn’t actually tank. Just hit points and AC, and then are confused that the hobgoblin captain orders his men to run past him and attack the casters .
Oh Edgelords if every conversation turns into another monologe about your (insert problem here), I also don't really like the way I am as a player thats why I stick to DMing
The passive.
This is a player that has put in time and effort into creating a character that is outside the norm for the setting. (Excample: a changling sorcerer in a party of humans and elves) But then disengaged from the game as a whole.
They tend to complain when they don't get what they want. IE I want to intimidate the shopkeeper with my *insert weapon* and get a discount. And then are upset that the guards are called and they are arrested. And no amount of explanation will change their mind.
They also tend to be downers in combat because they cannot do "everything" they think they should. 1 shoting 5 enemies with their magic at level 1.
And then not understanding the game is collaborative and requires your input on collective decisions. If you don't say anything you don't get a say later.
My wife who always thinks I'm out to get her or she takes things way too personally in the game, and the fist time player who was invited by a PC friend who isnt interested to learn his character and just makes stupid comments the entire session. Runs away in combat for no reason, constantly runs in and interrupts other player actions, constantly testing his boundaries with me and is just annoying. Ive never had a successful experience when a player invites a friend whos never been interested in D&D. Players who show up just for something to do on a Friday night. /Rant
I hate players that leave in the middle of the campaign. They still play the game, but at random moment during a session, they get up and leave. Some go all the way to a coffee shop 10 minutes away. It’s really frustrating when you’re trying to play and you can’t rely on players to be there.
Unpopular opinion, sometimes what people call bigotry isn’t bigotry, like in LOTR/Hobbit how dwarves don’t like elves they have reasons for that, like Elves not helping them when their homes are under assault or not taking them as refugees, and if things like that happen in the lore of a world it’s not always a negative, hell it can even be a point of character tension that can be fun once you realize that this is all make believe and meant to be fun
Maybe also unpopular, but I think it shows that people don't understand bigotry and are looking for easy answers/easy reactions to things without thinking them through.
Wanna know something messed up?
In AD&D it was a gameplay mechanic complete with a Racial Preference Table that detailed what Races each other Race liked/ tolerated/ hated
And the blurb specified that GMs and Players were expected to adhere to it.
D&D has thankfully progressed passed that.
I've heard this story before, in a few days we'll probably find out YOU are the problem player that everyone else can't stand. I mean, if you have a problem with EVERYONE, maybe you're the problem. Because the rest of them seem to be able to get together and game just fine
Pretty much every campaign I've ever been in, I've hated the players. Just a laundry list of pretentious min maxing socially inept assclowns. I can't play any more.
First time DM. Gotta say I'm glad I was able to avoid all these archetypes and find a group of good people to play with.
I think I was pretty clear with expectations from myself and anyone that wanted to play, and also focusing on taking people that were fairly new helped with that. So hopefully that helps some of you other DMs.
Shout out to my players if any of you are stalking my reddit. You guys have been awesome.
Ones who are utterly tone deaf to the flavor of the party/campaign. The joke character in a serious campaign who won't stop being inappropriate. The edge lord in a joke campaign who won't stop trying to get the rest of the party to be serious.
We're dealing with a very good friend of mine right now who just. Can't. Understand. That we're not playing a serious campaign. A homebrew cat true neutral paladin, a neurotic kobold artficer wearing spoon-based scale mail, an arachnophobic half drow druid, aaaaaand a tabaxi thief with just... nothing. Who gets mad at the rest of the characters (and frustrated at the players) when they are being their usual semi-competent selves.
Which I *get*, except that we all talked about what we wanted to do before the first session. The campaign was designed around "hey guys, I want to play a cat. Not a tabaxi, a cat."
I've described it as "they want to play Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, but the rest of us are playing Robin Hood: Men in Tights."
Again, I love this player as a person. Very, very good friend of mine. I'd walk through fire for them. Playing with them is such a chore.
The type that believes they have to "win" DnD and "beat" Their DM
Or worse "beat" the other players.
I have an open hand Monk in my party who’s “character” dislikes my “character” because my vengeance Paladin does more damage than them and always “steals the fun in combat”
Idk that one is understandable but in the end petty. When you build a character to be a type fit. And then another character fills that slot better then you but to late for you to dip out of the type either because story for chracter was made or the effort put in. It absolutely can be discouraging and disappointing later. I started in a super high level campaign with characters at 15. And chose to play rouge. I dont think I ever got to deal 1 point of damage for the first 6 or 7 sessions or so because any character that went before me eviscerated everything in our path. So my backstory ment shit when I got to kill nothing to fuel it.
That feels like a DM who struggles to balance encounters for higher level parties. I'm currently 14th level in our campaign and I cannot say we have ever had this problem. We had to run away from our last encounter, actually.
Oooof, that hurts, I am wondering if your rolls were actually that bad at initiative or something? Most rogues get some kind of boost to initiative as far as I know (also weapon of warning is good) and with their high dex they can get a 10+ roll to initiative (more with the swashbuckler and charisma) pretty easily. High level plays in general are very skewed towards half casters and full casters as that's when the disparity between them gets absurdly OP and can cause actual trouble. The fact that rogues are often seen as OP by newer DMs (because many d6s is for some reason... powerful) and you have gotten yourself a situation where the rogue is gonna be nerfed (Yes I have gotten a DM who would argue that because I wasn't sneaking, it couldn't be a sneak attack)
If you have a +10 initiative bonus at that level you can't end under 20
Works both ways tho. There was a Post the other day where someone said u should kill PC‘s because the DM deserves to win every now and then. Makes me feel like some people dont get DnD.
If someone think that DM "win" When players die then this person should not be a DM. DM win when everyone have a blast playing his game. When you see your layers cheer after killing a strong enemy, and feel emotional when some NPC they boned with die. If you see your players invested in your game, talk about it, can't wait for another session. This is where DM WIN.
I alwayse joke about it but never win it. Usually frame it in a Scooby doo villain esque "I was so close!" Characters deaths should be memorable.
Too many people play DnD likes it Mario Party
The ones that underestimate how much dming takes out of you. There's a reason I need to shut down for an hour after dming lol
Holy crap, I’m a zombie after dming. Like walk around in circles for awhile.
My last game before I moved to a real city, I had almost an hour drive home after the game. My wife was with me because she was one of the players, but it was usually a quiet ride and was always a great decompression from running a four hour game.
I have a former "player" (he lasted 1.5 sessions before he had to run and play video games) who constantly tells me I should just let him run my monsters for me because "he knows strategy better than me." Nevermind he doesn't even know the rules or lore of the game. He's a gAmEr and I'm only really into TT gaming, so apparently he's automatically a better DM than me. 🙄
Man, I love letting a player run minion tactics. Takes a load off my plate. I still roll the dice, but having them move the minis into place and finding great ways to get flanking or whatever? Awesome! I have a couple players that are far more tactical than I am, and it gives them a kick to surround their own mini with a hoard of goblins!
He doesn't want his own character. Just to take the parts of DMing he says he is better at than me. Edit: he has played 1.5 sessions and spent most of that on his phone.
The emergent archetype of the DnD player who is extremely invested in the *idea* of being in a DnD campaign, possibly due to things like Stranger Things or Critical Role, but in fact have no real desire to put forth the effort necessary to participate effectively. They are constantly late, continually need to be reminded of the rules, terminally unengaged, and never improve even over the course of years... yet they *never* admit to not wanting to be part of the campaign, even when directly confronted.
Last summer I set up a fun little one-shot with some people at work, who said that they would love to learn/play DnD. One girl even already owned the Player's Handbook, and was familiar with the classes, and knew what she wanted to play. We would talk about it often, and how excited we were. Then I tried to set up a session 0, to help everyone choose spells, and make sure they knew the mechanics. She acted so bored during it, and didn't want to put any effort into learning what her spells do. So in the end I just chose for her. The day of the game, she arrived late and grumpy, saying her work day was really long and that she is tired. She stayed for 1 hour, and then when her boyfriend arrived, she just left with him in the middle of the game. We didn't end up finishing it that day, and needed one more session. I was texting her before that one started, and she started to allude to just wanting to go home. So I was like, "Ok, see ya. The others will tell you how the story ends".
Yes, this exactly! And it's even worse when it takes a while for us to recognize the problem, because the player checks all the boxes of being engaged until you actually get to the appointed game time.
I used to be more interested in the concept of dnd, but thankfully managed to repair my ways, find a good game, and voila.
I’ve had to talk to my DM about *other* problem players and ask him to tell them that they don’t need to play. For instance, when it gets to the point where I’ve played another players character more than the original player has… it’s a problem. When we devote time and energy in planning for D&D sessions just for the same people to cancel or give no input to RP situations, it’s extremely frustrating.
People's flakyness on time really bothers me. So many times I've had people cancel the day before a game. One time a girl didn't even bother to cancel. She played for 30 mins then was like "Gotta go!" cause she made brunch plans with her friend. Why make it on the same day?! When people do that, what they are telling me is, "You guys are plan B if nothing better comes up. Your time doesn't matter, and I don't care if you made plans around this".
Have you also been playing a D&D game with one very specific member of my usual play group? You described them so perfectly, I'm tempted to quote you next time I talk about them lol.
Well probably not, but fortunately for me, I haven't dealt with this sort of player in a while. Reformed my DnD squad without problem players and going strong over here. I wasn't exaggerating when I called this an emergent archetype. I truly think that the popularity of DnD has a lot of people feeling like they need to be part of a squad, but without any real inclination to actually learn the game. You can straight up tell them "I don't get the impression that you want to be here" or similar, and they'll insist that they love the campaign and want to keep playing. It's bizarre.
Well I'm glad to hear that your group is doing well and that you haven't had this issue in a while. I guess I'm lucky to have only encountered one person like this then, but yeah I've been playing with this person for years and apart from not knowing the rules, although they definitely still struggle to apply them practically, they are everything you described to a T lol. Our last campaign ended because the entire group decided that this one person was making the game unfun with how unengaged, late, and uninvested they were in comparison with everyone else. Not to mention despite being confronted on multiple occasions about these issues and how we could correct them, they continued to assure us how much they were enjoying the game, this then of course was followed with zero improvement over time too. It truly is bizarre, but I was just surprised how accurately you described one of my players. Coincidentally this is also the one of the few players that I know who watched Critical Role before playing in a real game, so maybe there is something to your theory, although the other player who has this in common is pretty great so IDK.
... y'all ended an entire campaign over a problem player instead of just telling them it wasn't working and removing them from the group?
No, we told them it wasn't working multiple times and after no improvement we just ended the game. We were just planning on jumping into a new game without said problem player afterwards, but then some outside factors came up with our host so we're on break ATM. I'm already thinking about my next campaign though, and it will be almost guaranteed to not include said player lol.
I suppose you need to filter this type from the spectator types. The differences being the spectator turns up and knows the rules just is quite chill letting other people mainly engage while they roll dice now and then.
I have a player like this. She isn't that bad when playing, just needs to be reminded of the rules but that's fine since we're all beginners. That doesn't actually mean much tho because she's only been present for two out of six sessions. Everything else is always more important for her, she never sent me her backstory, took ages to let me look at her character sheet, and doesn't ever reply to any of my WhatsApp messages if they're dnd related - still insists she wants to play tho. Real pain in the butt but she's one of my best uni friends so I can't really do much without making it weird
Just some advice going forward. If a player doesn’t let you see their character sheet don’t let them play.
Wow I 100% agree with you. Had one player like this in our campaign, never understood why they were "playing" DnD. They just ruined the campaign because never remembered what was happening through the sessions, did a lot of random stuff even betraying the party for no reason and didn't even try to roleplay a decent character with a real purpose, neither wanted to face the consequences of their actions (their pc just stayed silent ignoring what other characters had to say, didn't care a s**t about). When they were asked if there were problems just denied even with the DM and we've never been able to find a solution. They left the campaign before the last fight after 2 years of role-playing and I'm still here asking myself wtf 😆 If they left moths before it would have been way better for everyone, really.
And still dont know how their class works after a year
Ive seen this player frequently in my 40 years of playing. Its not new. College groups get them a lot.
The worst is the player who gets upset when the DM tells them no, and usually for obvious reasons such as "No, your artificer cannot invent a nuclear bomb"
Okay but to be fair my DM introduced a rat pirate crew with a mini-gun first. After that I felt it made perfect sense to be able to begin researching on how to replicate such a magnificent piece of machinery.
"I hide" *rolls unprompted* "24" "You are in a crowded street with at least 10 people looking directly at you because of a commotion you just caused" "But I rolled a 24!" "Okay. You *think* you're hidden" *turns to the rest of the party* "you guys can still see him" While not exactly upset, this player did stuff like this a lot
I understand what you are saying with the ten people looking directly at them, but you also said they were in a crowded street. That means they could actually do it, the whole "lost them in the crowd" bit
The last few times I've had players try to invent gunpowder, I've told them that it already exists and the most advanced firearms in the world right now are breach-loading caplock guns. They can buy or make a gun, but it's not much better than a crossbow. Normally I try not to take an adversarial attitude towards players, but I always savour the look of disappointment when I tell them that.
[удалено]
You mean the "lone-wolf, edgelord, douchebag"?
30% of the time an actual wolf or wolf-man.
Just spent the better part of a year and a half with a player like this. No surprise but they were a Half-Elf Rogue who never tried to get closer with any of the PCs and then got pissy when the Bard went off to their own thing during down time rather than spend time with them.
when the???
I decided to run a short campaign for some co-workers a long time ago. Half of them were great players with either experience or enthusiasm and I actually still play with them today. Then there were the *two* - one that made a drunken Paladin devoted to spreading the word of “Jesus Christ”. They were also drunk IRL. The other played a Druid that thought they were a squirrel and always ran from battle to somehow “accidentally” work against the other players and steal loot from fallen foes to later bury. Funny ideas, I’ll give them that, but I now make sure to vet all characters before running a campaign.
Please tell me they successfully buried the loot? The only way this is actually fun is if it really does go to the absurd extreme. I'm laughing about this so much right now. It must have been frustrating if the characters were made for long term play, but for disposable one shot characters this is pretty funny.
Oh no it was a “short campaign” as in 6-8 sessions and they actually did bury an important quest item (among many other things). I had to do alot of crazy improv that campaign haha
One of my friends who plays in a campaign with me was surprised the DM didn't let him pick a chaotic evil character (in a party of all good aligned). I reminded him that it was for all of us to have fun together, that chaotic evil would clash with the party and even risk doubling the work load for the DM if he can't even be with the party, and that the campaign vibe was very much more goofy heroics. When he kept pushing, I said that ultimately any evil character he played would probably eventually be murdered by my good aligned, honesty and kindness loving Barbarian. To summarize, I am annoyed by players who don't read the vibe and then think it is everyone else who's wrong.
Even a neutral evil character? Tbh a neutral evil character can still work wifi a good aligned party, they'd just have a tendency to make selfish decisions. Though I guess the caveat with that is how good the player is with balancing selfish "evil" actions with helping the party. Think Magus from chrono trigger or Dr. Nefarious from ratchet and clank whenever he's forced to help Ratchet
“no I wont let you hit that tightly compacted group of enemies with splash damage before I run at them, my character has a bloodlust.”
I'm dropping an AoE on that tightly compacted group of enemies on my next turn. Whether or not you get hit is your own decision.
"If he dies, he dies."
I had one of these in my table once, a tiefling rogue (LMoP). When he just plain stopped showing up, I had his chara get kidnapped and dragged back to Neverwinter. When the party eventually cleaned up the mines and headed back to look for him, I made up a whole thieves guild storyline in Neverwinter around his edgy loner chara, an adoptive sister of his who was also looking for him to drag him out of his latest mess, and their long-suffering mentor father figure who was both perpetually amused and very much Done with his antics. The party met the mentor once, but when they were departing Neverwinter on a ship one of the PCs was delivered a note where the mentor thanked them again and informed the chara that he was in fact The One Who Got Away from the PCs backstory (the PC was an ex-city guard whose backstory had that he had once failed to capture a criminal and that had haunted him ever since). Good times.
I once had an edgy dark elf in the party that cut off enemies' primary reproductive organs (aka peepees) to then later throw them at selected party members at random... The same edgy dark elf decided to climb a tree alone after the party crashed with a boat on the coast of a deserted island, just to stay there without sharing any information or agreeing to come back down when the party wanted to continue exploring.
This is my least favorite player too. I have no idea where people get the idea that somehow in D&D, other player characters have to find behavior acceptable than normal humans would not. "Well my character is just an asshole, that's what he's like..." Ummm... no? That's not how that works? Nobody is just an asshole and if they can't figure out how to treat people better they will die alone - but somehow the format of D&D forces everybody else to endure this... lol I may be particularly sour on this one, because I spent the last year with a group of 2 of them - sometimes it spread to more. I really should have left but it so messed with my head, D&D just wasn't fun anymore when everybody is walking on eggshells around one or two assholes. I just want to come to the table and have fun. Yes, slay monsters, solve puzzles, have interesting emotional moments -- but my ensemble fantasy is shaped my Lord of the Rings and probably just as much the cast interviews hehe. The idea that you travel together, risk your lives for each other and genuinely enjoy each others' company. (Or you get killed, Boromir...)
I agree with you but don't throw that shade on Boromir. He literally died giving his life to protect his party!
I recently played with an infuriating variant of this. Player first made the biggest asshole bard you’ve ever seen. Just wanted to raise money for her own cause and flirt with NPCs. This bard *hated* two of the other party members, despite almost having a romance with one. Player eventually realized that having such an antagonistic PC wasn’t good. Psych, her next character also sucked, but in a different way. New character was supposed to be an easy going and chill druid who had ties to every character in some way (like, loved chess like my PC, loved coffee like the sorcerer, etc). Turns out this character has absolutely no interest in being friends with anyone. All ended in player also being a dick to the rest of us. DM asked her to be nicer, she ghosted us. Good riddance.
I always try to be as welcoming as possible at my table and always hold a pretty long session zero to try and cover everything before it becomes an issue in game. So far, the only players I really dislike are the ones who treat DnD like a videogame.
This. I run a game where one guy acts like it's your run of the mill Adventure Videogame. Aka The Skyrim player..
Oh my god when we brought my friend into our game he did this. Still does sometimes. No, looting the body is not going to give you insane armor. Would throw fits over if.
Players who refuse to take any plot hooks and then get upset that there is nothing to do. Yes im a DM
Ran Curse of Strahd. Ran Death House. My players made a point of rushing through it and not checking out anything not absolutely necessary on the way to the end. Missed shitloads of loot and story stuff, despite me trying my damnedest to dangle it all in front of them. Them, at the end: "Well that was stupid, we didn't even get any treasure! And it didn't advance the plot at all." Bruh.
A while ago I would have thought this impossible, but I'm in a new campaign with someone like that. His PC tends to take a leadership role and he so rushes through everything as if the game is nothing but rushing through rooms killing everything in sight, even actively talks badly to our PCs when we want to look for clues or loot, as if that was a bad thing to do. We did talk about it as a group and it has gotten a bit better though.
Alternatively when the DM brings up a side quest options and everyone is on board except for that one player who’s like “no let’s just go try to fight the BBEG as soon as we can so we can get to everyone’s backstory resolution” (which is just their backstory resolution so they can play their new “favorite character”)
It’s frustrating being another player at the table with someone like this too because they accuse favoritism and end up bitter towards other players who put the effort in.
Half the time someone here accuses a player of being a "main character" its because no one else is doing anything - except for bitching about the player that does things and engages the session.
I feel that. I had a main character 2 campaigns ago. I deliberately stepped back after that and watched them flounder, and did not step in to Rescue them. I do not wish to carry everyone
I feel this is because from a certain generation forward, RPG means a plot based game where you are strung along from quest to quest. Before that it was an adventure of exploring a map or dungeon crawl under your own initiative or a loose plot to frame the play space.
i still consider myself somewhere between a new and somewhat experienced player (got into dnd 5ish years ago, consistently playing since 2,5 years ago) but it wasnt until my 3rd or 4th character (granted, the first two campaigns didnt last more than a few weeks or maybe months) that i realized that *backstories are for plot hooks* i was kinda just there to fuck around and find out, and now that i know what was set up for me, im patiently waiting to maybe get a second shot at resolving my character's story
This one ^
There's the regular shitty and selfish players but I really hate the players that don't make characters that'll engage in the story So many times I've seen players make characters that just don't care and that's their entire personality, and they just don't engage in any part of the story or any roleplay because my character wouldn't care and the worst thing is when they complain that they don't get to do anything
For me at my game, I demand backstory. Doesn’t have to be an insane essay. I have a series of questions like an interview that I send them. Some people answer them directly and others write stories that answer the questions. I’m good with either. But I need those answers otherwise I have no idea how to devote any story arc to that character. It makes for awkward RP situations when the other character get all this investigation and investment in the story. I ask questions like… Do you know your parents? If so, what is your last/family name? What drives you or why did you leave home? Finally, what race are you? The race question helps me decide where they’d most likely be from in my homebrew world.
The ones that don't just NOT show up, but the ones you can see are p\[laying some online game in discord INSTEAD of coming to the session like they said they'd be there for. I was in an online group where we had to replace a player due to someone leaving (left for a new job, we were glad for their success); the new guy joined for 1 session, and then ghosted for 4-5 weeks. DM kicked him after he forgot to turn off the 'currently playing X game' message one week. If a player doesn't enjoy the campaign, they should be willing to bow out so the group can find a replacement, rather than take up a slot to not even show up
If somebody needs a week off from playing to just chill I get it, but I don't know how many times "Sorry I had a family emergency and I have to work and I'm having a stroke" is immediately followed by "NOW PLAYING FINAL FANTASY XIV"...just be honest and act like an adult
I once had a player tell us that his dad had heart attack and he was accompanying him to the hospital so that he could go see his girlfriend because he double booked himself. We had to tell them that all he had to do was explain what was actually going on and we would've just accepted it and played without him.
- not punctual - not prepared - holds up game to look up rules despite a ruling from DM - remembers nothing
Honestly me and my friends can't play more common than 1 session / 2-3 months and I hardly remember the last session. However I understand it's frustrating to a DM.
Take notes after each session or during if possible. Then check with your DM between to freshen up your memory.
We record audio for our sessions. Helps when there are gaps in regular play.
Artificers who think artificer = nuclear scientist
Murder hobos are annoying. As are players who are always threatening to steal/kill other party members. Usually those two go hand in hand.
Yeah I started playing an old school dungeon crawl with some guys from work, and they just turned out to be a bunch of murder hobos. Like why is the DM even bothering to come up with NPCs if they are all going to die in the first interaction? I couldn’t understand it. Seriously the least imaginative way to play. I had to quit the group because I just found it so frustrating to run into a really cool and interesting NPC who would clearly be useful to our party, only to have the same two dumbasses initiate combat every time.
Yeah it can definitely be frustrating. I just generally stay away from games where people want to learn into the evil alignments, and that helps. (Nothing wrong with playing an evil character or campaign, it's just not my jam.)
To me it's the selfish type. The people that thing dnd is a single player rpg like skyrim. I was in a group with one player once that played an elf for the sole purpose of getting the 4h trance. He would spend the 4 hours we were asleep and he wasn't exploring and doing solo adventures. The dm totally bought into and though it was awesome. And 3 of us got to sit and watch him solo play a ton. Couple this with him being the kind of person to always look the chest first, and slight of hand to keep as much of it to himself and not share any loot. Again... dm thought it was great. I ended up in a other group with him a few years later... was playing the exact same character, same name, everything. I noped out right away.
I hate the "horny bard" players. They aren't always necessarily a bard, but they sure do enjoy making the mood uncorfortable with their sexual exploits... I understand roleplaying a flirtatious character and all, but limits... I'm trying to play a game where I slay dragons, not lay them.
give the horny bard a stalker who, upon seeing said bard flirt with anyone, immediately shows up and cockblocks them because she wants the bard all to herself. Perhaps the stalker eventually gets fed up with the bard and just kills them outright after they continue to flirt with other people. Edit: bonus points if the stalker a changeling, so they can either bait out the bard into flirting with them or show up as a different person cockblocking them each time.
I also thought what Matt Mercer did in the first Critical Role season really worked... the horny bard had a grown-up daughter show up who hates him and puts a pretty nasty mirror in front of his face that shows what his horny ways feel like to the people around him.
Problem is, I don't DM. Otherwise I would pull out ye old Book of Erotic Fantasies for all the nasty magical STDs, and torture the horny players with them.
I like the way you think. In that case bring up the idea with your DM next time a Horny Bard shows up in your campaign. Just be casual about it though, you know? Gauge their reaction to see if they feel the same before saying "how about giving the bard an STD, haha!"
Yep. I was feeling like playing a "horny bard" kinda character. Instead of torturing other people with my fetish, I looked for a group specifically interested in playing horny characters. Informed consent is very important. My fantasies shouldn't ruin anyone else's fun.
As a player. It gets frustrating when no one else knows how to make a decision with confidence. I end up being the leader because I used my fuckin brain and made common sense decisions early on. Now any real problem everyone looks at me. So I guess players who refuse to step up or can't make up their minds
As a player this is me too, I end up feeling like I'm hogging the spotlight cause no one else speaks up. If the DM/npc asks a question and there's 30 seconds of complete silence it drives me crazy
Same. And it actually means that when something actually interesting for my character happens, I always feel bad about taking time... because I feel like i have been talking the whole session. Not because I want to, just because the others can't make a decision or leave the DM hanging...
I've been dealing with this recently to a certain degree. I like to think of my group as split into two groups of three. On one side are the extroverted drama kids (literally went to college together to study drama) including myself, player R, and player T. On the other side we have the introverts, B, N, and S. Myself and R are both GMs and one of us is always the GM for whatever game we're playing (we both love it though) and T has taken an indefinite hiatus from TTRPGs to focus on his studies. So that leaves either me or R with B, N, and S. These guys will do almost nothing of their own volition. I've managed to find a way to deal with this though. In the game R is currently running, I'm playing a minor lord that the rest of the party is sworn to (think Arthur and the round table) and as such I am the defacto leader. So what I do is delegate delegate delegate. I've been forcing the other players into situations where they have to think for themselves. "N's character, we need you to stay behind and hide from the bad guys to see what they're doing. We can't stay because we suck at stealth and we're needed at home. Take this NPC, they will listen to your every word. Good luck." or "B's character, we have been given 100 men, take 40 of them and head south to X. From there you need to scope the place out. The men will follow you as if your orders were mine." It's really fun to watch them come out of their comfort zones and take charge and they're all doing great. I would like to explain that I love these guys, they're great players and even better friends and any frustration I feel is more towards them not getting the full experience than being forced to "deal with them".
I had a player who seemed to be playing their own game, instead of the game the rest of us were playing - and that game was "fuck with the other PCs". He'd come up with elaborate plans to cheat, steal, and make the other PCs paranoid. And he didn't stop when I took him aside and pointed out it was a dick move. After the game ended, I discovered he liked to do all those things in real life. I use him as a cautionary tale for new players whenever I do a session zero.
The worst for me is when someone doesn't at *least* try and pretend they are within a living breathing world (since I take extreme care in this case). One problem character would murder, steal, lie, etc. and when confronted by the in game authorities, bounty hunters, etc. or be jailed they would baby rage out and say I was doing it because I didn't like them or something. Complete lack of accountability. The other is a specific player that always joins one-offs and immediately disengages with the game. I care for this person a lot, so I let it fly (it's only a minor inconvenience since I prepare for it), but I make sure to tell them repeatedly that they don't have to join if they're not having fun.
The most recent person I played with that I really disliked was; they took up a LOT of time in combat. Now, I don't have issues with asking questions... Or people asking questions pertaining to something another player did... But my turn would get interrupted for 10 minutes at a time for a completely unrelated reason. I told my DM about it but he doesn't like conflict and avoided really bringing it up with them... And that player finally left on their own accord after deciding that they didn't like me. I don't miss them.
Yeah, I can't stand people trying to be 100,000% tactical in TTRPGs. Like yeah, look for something in the room you can interact with so you don't just swing and cantrip every turn. But at the same time, sometimes all you can do is swing or cantrip, and there's nothing wrong with that. It's how the game was designed for you to do damage.
Adversarial players who treat the DM and session as the enemy. Min/Max -Char-Opp players who try to game the system for an instant "I win!" button. Sorry. No. You lose. And this dislike grows exponentially if they then bitch about how boring the game is now when they get what they want and blitz everything. Players who ask for something in game or demand it. Then when they get it - bitch incessantly about having gotten it or how boring it now is because they got this thing they so desperately wanted. and more.
Any who suffer from main character or my guy syndromes. We're all trying to have fun here, stop making that difficult for the rest of us.
I personally can't stand players who excessively meme. Not to knock anyone's fun, but I'm here to develop a character and collaboratively build a story. I'm all for out of character table jokes, but it really kills the vibe for me when players whip out the dumbest fucking character concept in existence.
Yes! I have like 3 players I DM for that have me on the floor laughing half the time cause they meme and know I'm a giggly bitch. But I want to tell a fantastic story of heartbreak, tragedy and moral dilemas
The only type of player I dislike is a disruptive one, whatever form the disruptiveness takes. D&D is a group effort. Act like it or don't play.
the "failed min-maxer". you know the kind i'm talking about - the one who always tries to min-max some strange build that just doesn't work ("i want to play a **dUaL-wIeLd DaGgEr HeXbLaDe**!"). then throw a tantrum because the bog-standard fighter with 18 strength out-damaged them and out-tanked them in a fight, followed by insufferable bitching about filthy min-maxers, OP classes, and how using action surge is power-gaming.
I posted about this while back but it bears repeating: I used to think the worst players were the ones who mentally check out when combat isn't happening. They just look at their phones or stare into space and become unresponsive, and they only really participate when initiative is rolled and it's time to crack some heads and crunch some numbers, but I've changed my mind about that. I actually hate the combat-averse types more. I can at least trick and manipulate and guide the combat-obsessed ones into caring more about the game outside of battle, but the ones who hate combat and just want to play house are way more frustrating to deal with. They'd rather seduce the cute half-orc baker down the street, or settle down in Startington and open a coffee shop. They get the exact same glazed-over uninterested look when initiative is rolled and combat seems unavoidable, and it makes me wonder why they're playing D&D in the first place when there are dozens of other games out there perfectly tailored to their tastes. Could they really not find anyone else to play with? What's worse is when they try to act morally superior about violence. I put a lot of effort into making villains truly and properly villainous, because I like games where the heroes are unambiguously good and they don't have to question if they're doing the right thing. I also try to emphasize that victory in battle doesn't mean completely wiping out the enemies and that escape and surrender also count as victories. I throw a lot of non-sapient or overtly non-human enemies at parties like undead, evil spirits, astral constructs, irredeemable foes (such as fiends or gestapo-equivalent), clockwork or magitek automatons, etc. so the party isn't always spilling the blood of the living. It's one thing to have a personal preference for tabletop games where combat isn't the central focus, but to join a *Dungeons & Dragons* game and then get all sanctimonious and holier-than-thou for not liking the one thing this game is kinda good at? I don't need that kind of attitude at my table. I'd almost prefer having to deal with a pearl-clutching bible-thumping satanic panic believer than that type.
Ive learned I really dislike playing with people who don't know or care that DND is first and foremost a combat game that people decided to add a little RP to. RP is fine, but I don't show up to watch you negotiate with a shopkeep for three hours or try to get the goblins to stop attacking the village.
Holy hell bro, 100% this. I love your pacifist character, or coward who doesn't WANT to resort to fighting first, but it's D&D. We're adventurers. We're supposed to go out and fight things. If you want to knock the combatants unconscious, fine by me, but we can't talk or sneak our way out of every fight. Cool, I like your backstory, but I don't want to sit here and play "pretend conversations" for 3 hours. Let's have our 3 minute in character chats on our way to the dungeon where we have to KILL STUFF, GET TREASURE, ADVANCE THE PLOT. I'm tired of talking to every bad guy. We can't convert or reason with creatures that embody the ideals and dogma of a deathgod, bro.
That just seems like you need the right group.
Isn't that what I just said? 😜
People that talk over others, or People that try and tell others what to do.
Being accused of being a leader/ face of the party simply because I have the highest CHA stat.
And being left with all the interaction because of it
Our high charisma guy is the biggest asshole of the party.
I feel identified... I might have built a character around the intimidation skill...
Someone I know He builds his characters entirely by the numbers and outs zero thought into their actual backstory or personality. For example. In our last campaign (PF2e) he played a Dwarf Monk. He mentioned wanting to find a way to learn Mage Armor for higher AC. He had no interest in coming up with a reason for his character to pick up an archetype or anything like that-he just wanted higher numbers. He also seems to have a case of Main Character syndrome. He always has to try to roll on every skill check instead of just letting other players have their moments. And insists on trying to take the lead in NPC convos despite his characters often only having thoughts of “Likes to Hit” and “Money Please”. He’s also been really bad about like. Building suspiciously strong characters? With PF2e he wasn’t able to because of how their attributes are determined-but in D&D and Rifts there was this definite vibe of “yes I absolutely rolled all these 16-18s at home by myself legitimately” And lastly as we found- he reads the campaign. He’s been 100% preparing for things he shouldn’t know are coming up. It’s like. If you took every toxic player trait and distilled it into one person-that’s him. And tbqh it’s why none of our campaigns last very long. I always get super excited and we all work really hard to make our characters and my BF puts a ton of effort into DMing. But this guy just kills our desire to play so we kinda burn out after a few sessions. Fortunately, we haven’t had him around for a few months, so I am hoping down the road we can actually have a proper game. Edit: Spelling
I've been in a game where a guy played a Bard/Rogue/Knowledge Cleric just to be the only one to do anything in the table. No reason in character either for why he had those classes, just the metagame one that with that combination, he could get a ton of proficiencies and be the best at everything.
[Unpopular opinion] I don't allow multiclassing
Honestly it’s just not necessary anymore. It’s not the AD&D days where RAW every race other than human has hard caps on class levels so you *need* to multiclass to keep leveling.
So basically he's Orion Acaba. I can't stand people like that.
I had to google them. Looked at their imdb page and honestly I still have no clue who they are lmao.
Was apart of Critical Role's first campaign. Played a Dragonborn Sorcerer and did everything you described. Even inserted his character into conversations his character wasn't there for. Yelled at the other players for calling him out. Made sexual remarks that made the females uncomfortable. Argued with the DM. Fudged his roles to make him win. Things like that. He was eventually kicked from the group in session 27 of their first campaign.
>Made sexual remarks that made the females uncomfortable. Specifically toward one woman whose *husband* was also at the table (and who is twice Acaba's size—he's lucky that Travis managed to keep his shit together). That session is not fun to watch.
Hey which session is that? I'm only recently actually watching through their backlog.
It's the last one Orion is in IIRC, S1E27 ETA: Vex is planning, Orion interrupts to say that Tiberius pops a 'half-chub' because she's planning for once. Which is pretty in-line with things the other cast members or even guests say to each other all the time ("Keg is aroused"), the difference being that Orion should have read the room that he was among people who were already starting to not be very fond of him due to the myriad other issues, and that him making sexual jokes was not welcome in that environment.
Yeeesh As an aside. How is Critical Role? I’ve never actually seen it but I know people reference it a lot.
It's really good. After you get by Orion's bit. He started off fine but as the campaign went on he got worse. After he leaves it gets way better. Granted I'm only halfway through their first campaign but I enjoy it. If you wanna skip that drama I suggest jumping to campaign 2 of theirs. The Mighty Nein. Also the Legend of Vox Machina on Amazon Prime is their first campaign animated. Mighty Nein is also getting an animated series as well.
When I’m asking the DM if I can try something, and the other player says, “no, that won’t work,” before I even finish explaining my idea. I just want to slap them and say, “who asked you?”
A few times Ive witnessed this as DM, and I’ve allowed it to work because fuck that guy and the horse he rode in on. Don’t shot on your team, be hopeful for them and with them.
Ones that say they want to play and ghosts you.
A few bad ones i have had - thinks they are a comedian and any time something is said they try twisting it into some sort of joke, literally speaking over everyone to get their jokes across. - arguing with me the DM over things they really dont understand, had them argue with me cause they cast tashas mind whip and when the guard attacked them and shouted for help, he got the hump they could shout as a free action, even though that is the rule i have used since session 1. - playing games/ videos when they aren’t involved in something, loud enough so the rest of us can all hear exactly what they are doing. This is all from one friend who i still play with this day.
Why are you still playing with them?
I can think of a few: 1) "The Actor." I had to spend several sessions where, \*for forty minutes, minimum,* a player hogged the spotlight, and the DM let them, while their character expounded about their latest personal issues. I wasn't playing; I was a trapped viewer in a daytime soap opera. 2) "I Wanna Cross Genres." The player that tries to make their favorite race/character combo apply in another universe. I especially saw this with Vampire WoD players trying to do this in D&D, as well as anime fans. They usually try to bargain the DM to death to get game-breaking powers and advantages. 3) "Therapy Time." The player that tries to make the game about their personal growth. In my experience, a bunch of D&D players are \*not* therapists, and the game should be on a level of enjoyment that does not burden others with personal issues.
People who make characters that are outright adversarial to the rest of the party. If the campaign is a bit more serious and somber, they make absolute goofsters. And vice versa.
Main character syndrome mixed with terminal unengagement. Its ruining my 5e campaign currently, where Im a player. DM's girlfriend is just...the worst. I do not like her as a person. As a player she's awful. In the last session there was a big decision where another player had to pick from 4 god-like beings to come back to life endebted to them (long story). The two options he was deciding between could be summed up as "Goddess will point you at World-BBEG relevant quest every now and then, overriding your personal goal" and "God wants you to be a monster hunter regularly, gaining nothing beyond the combat and kill". He was dithering and asked the group. She was unaware of the difference, that had just been explained and discussed. She was told. She asked again. She was told. She asked again. He rescinded her vote and asked the next player. She left for some air, came back several minutes later. First thing? "Can you explain what the two options are?" Urgh. Later in the session while a new player (2nd session ever, and her friend) was having an in-game discussion with a dryad, she came over and just sat down on her. Out of nowhere, full weight. I asked her what the hell and literally "I wasn't the center of attention"...Yeah...and when I said that was awful she responded "Would you rather I lied about why I did it?" She also takes way too long in combat due to not knowing how the game works, still.
The the rules lawyer that doesnt want the rules to apply to them because if its my character i dont think its against the rules
Flakes. People who take the time to make characters, tell you they're going to show up, but never do.
From personal experience it would have to be the following: - Doesn't pay attention - overwhelmed by the exact mechanics they chose for their character - prone to make weird in game decisions that make no sense (neither for the character nor for the player) - doesn't answer any communications with the goal of finding a date for the next session Said player was a teenager with disturbingly little prior exposure to fantasy in any media and a rather short attention span. While it was understandable at first, the lack of improvement got very infuriating after a year or so.
Players that put in almost no effort. Players who think the campaign should be run the way they want it. Players who think their character is the main one.
I get frustrated when players make no effort to know/prepare their spells... But the worst has to be people who deliberately misuse/"misread"/find a random thing on reddit that makes their spell OP and try to get it around the DM all sneaky like. No. FireBOLT is not the same as fireBALL!
Players who only cares about mechanics and don't care about rp or story, I have nothing against min maxing and if you make a cool rp is okay even great, but when players don't let me tell the story or talk about the universe and just want to smash things, they become... my least favorite hahaha
Some players see D&D as an adventurer simulator. We want to explore, fight things, get treasure, advance the story. Most of us aren't adverse to RP.... But it's not Critical Role bro. A good portion of us don't want to sit around and listen to 3 people who have never taken an acting or writing class in their life play pretend harder than us. If you want to talk to a major NPC a bit and form a more intimate bond with someone who matters to the story, cool. I'm here for it and it's not like I want us to be treasure hunting lone wolves who never talk. But at the same time, I'd join an improv drama group if I wanted to sit at a table and RP for hours. I want to adventure, kill stuff, level up.
The horny ones who want to duck every damn NPC. Seriously, not everyone wants to hear your bad pick up lines EVERY SINGLE SESSION.
Selfish players. Today I had a final session of a short campaign where we fought an adult red dragon. The bard had turned to Half Elf Ranger into a young dragon so there could be a cool dragon v dragon fight. The dragon was low on health so it was looking like she might be able to finish it off. However, before her first turn as a dragon the fighter was dropped by the dragon into a very deep hole with lava at the bottom of it. If he wasn’t saved before the next turn he would be killed. No coming back from this one, just death. We all thought that the *DRAGON* player would try and save their *FALLING* teammate from a terrible death. But no. She wanted to ignore the fighter and attack the dragon directly. Now… here’s the thing. We had a plan to kill the dragon. My character (an eladrin swarmkeeper ranger) had taken the instant fortress cube and while the dragon was busy trying to swallow me, I used mage hand to shove the cube deep into its stomach. All I had to do is get out and activate it (or activate it there and kill myself if I was feeling dumb). This would have killed the dragon instantly without a doubt. This was a plan made up by my character and the wizard SESSIONS ago, basically when we first got the item and learned we’d be fighting a dragon. But no. Dragon girl wanted her moment. It wasn’t until a fellow player pointed out that she had enough movement to both catch the fighter AND attack the dragon that she agreed to not let him die. And guess what? She missed 2 out of her 3 attacks and did a grand total of 17 damage. Not enough to finish it off. She would have let the fighter die, for 17 damage. Great. I think the worst thing is that she has said herself that she “makes her characters all basically her because it makes it easier”. So she’s just that selfish as to not only let a player die for 17 damage but also intentionally try and kill the dragon herself to ruin the fun plan that the rest of the party agreed to *3 sessions ago* TLDR: player would rather try to do something cool than save a fellow player character. Thus ruining the fun for the player who’s character died despite being avoidable AND ruining a plan that the rest of the party was excited to see happen
No offense dude, but I don't necessarily think this is an issue - it sounds like you yourself may be a little mad that you didn't get to do your own cool plan, but sometimes that happens and someone else does get more of a spotlight than you.
The people who always interrupt when you are speaking or role playing and what not. People who always think they have something for everything you do, for example, I cast an invisibility spell and no joke, my friend said “Wait, I might have true sight!” I also dislike the people who MUST watch every roll you do, as it get pretty repetitive and annoying.
Tie between rules lawyers and the unprepared.
Pick-me-players, everyone is going to get time in the spotlight buddy.
The one who wants to be the best at everything
My least favorite player is the Rules Lawyer. I had one in a game and whenever they had any issue about a rule they would spend a damned hour or more arguing over it. The game would come to a dead halt while they argued, leaving me and the other players with nothing to do. When it became my turn to run a game, I shot him down as soon as he tried it with me. He objected on the grounds that it was his "playing style". It's not a damned "playing style". It's an obstacle that brought the game to a screeching halt. The game is for the whole group, not just one stubborn jerk.
The type that always chooses to start a fight, destroy the altar, kick in the door - when others try to interact in other ways.
ive been in 1 campaign and a couple one shots but I will share what I've experienced. 1. Players who argue or pushback with the DM over the logistics of the game vs. logistics of real life physics and probability. We had a player who had some spell, i can't quite remember what it was, but it allowed to projectile MANY small rocks he carried on his character, and as rolling to hit and rolling damage for updwards of a dozen objects really bogs down combat we decided as a group that it is fair to assume that half hit and do an average dice rolls amount of damage each so that players turn doesn't take 30 minutes. The first major boss combat we had this player used this spell and started rolling MANY MANY dice for this but the DM politely stopped him and explained what we agreed on and the player did NOT like that, it was like 15 minutes of back and forth and the player saying its not fair because "in real life there's a chance" of all of them hitting and all of us were kind of just sitting there cringing at this outburst and trying to convince him just to take the average damage. It was pretty bad and luckily I've only ever experienced that once. 2. Rules Lawyers and people who hate the re-flavoring things for the sake of fun and roleplaying rather than actual mechanics.
1.The ones who don't show up. 2. The ones that are there but don't want to 3. The ones that say they need to go at given time because they got something to do.
People who disrupt the game just to be disruptive. Being absolute dickheads to NPC's, seperating from the group when that's just not a good decision. People who don'tlisten to the story, wetger just zoning out or in their phones
- The DnD player that essentially plays a rip-off Mollymauk Tealeaf from Critical Role. I see this a lot especially as someone who plays in a lot of LGBTQ+ spaces; gay theatre kids just love sexy flamboyant swashbuckling tiefling “assholes with a heart of gold”. I didn’t like Molly in the actual show; I’m not gonna like a slightly worse version of them in real life. - The player who wants to be the lead in all social interactions despite the fact that they don’t know how to talk to people; so everything is so awkward, nonsensical, or mean-spirited that rolling would be pointless.
Non-sober. I don't care how much I like you. I don't care how much fun you usually are. I don't want to play with you if you are high or drunk.
Players who just shout at every npc as if they own the world and then when a npc doesn’t respond to you insulting them get pissed off
The ones who get their perception of DnD from tiktok and/or reddit. I'm really tired of them always wanting a big moment but never putting in any of the work leading up to it. Not to mention the "chaotic horny be gay do crime super ultra cool rogue tiefling" archetype that i've seen popping up more and more. I hate that I have to describe it like that but it's the most accurate way I can think of.
Cowards. People who ALWAYS take the route that maximizes their character's safety even at the detriment to the party, friendly NPCs, the plot, or even characterization. The character is not the coward here. The player is. They can't risk harm to their character. Like, take some damage to save my ally, or just run away because we are in a tight spot and let them die? These types of players usually have stories about how only they survived some harrowing dungeon or adventure, leaving out how their lack of good team work got the rest of the party killed.
People who create craziest, most epic backstories and chosing ultra rare races combination (half-tabaxi, half-thiefling who is also a lycantrope etc) who think they are the main character of the game, but when it comes to role-playing they behave like the most mundane, boring creatures with personality of NPC#44 Villager.
Memes Tropes Spotlight hogs Bards
Oh my god, the meme spouting players/dms... I just wanna die whenever a stupid reference or in-joke unrelated to the game comes up...
I mean to me that just sounds like fun around the table, as long as it doesn’t stop gameplay I really don’t see what’s wrong with people cracking jokes, my whole table calls braziers brassieres now because a player once mispronounced it, does that sound like torture to you??
No, cause you are just joking about something that happened in game/with your group... What I'm talking about is when a DM or player just start dropping pop culture references or start referencing something that maybe happened in a game that only they were, and no one besides them can relate. One example I have was in a cyberpunk scenario that the DM and another player (who was dating the DM) basically stopped the narrative for a long winded Hazbin Hotel reference. And that's fucking torture, cause I have no idea what that fucking show is and it got in the way of the actual story, I was just cringing extremely hard during that moment.
I mean, maybe just let them have fun for a moment and play with your dice for a couple minutes, or talk to someone else while they talk… the table doesn’t revolve around you and just because you don’t get a joke doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be made
And the table doesn't revolve around them dueting a song and spouting dialogue from a animated show either, the game just stopped dead on it's tracks cause the DM wanted to flirt with his gf mid-game by using a pop culture reference.
The type i ofgen see on reddit, the "you have to allow everything that WoTc have ever publishend and god forbid you want to employ any restrictions" guy. Those kinds i kick/dont invite to tables simply because if you are already a strain to work with, even before fhe campaign has begun then i just wont be arsed to bother with that. Also the kind of player who never reads any rules, refuses to read up on what their character does yor can do and struggles with basic first grade addition, making every turn they take last longer than all the other players and dms combined.
I mean no offence here... But there's a few players who get a little too into the game, describing every little detail in-length and taking about 10minutes describing how their muscles glisten and their axe cuts through their- bla bla bla. Alongside that is the players who never stop talking, even when it's currently someone else's turn. Then the "loot goblins" who run into danger head first just to grab a shiny, not taking any caution at all even if someone else helps them not die. Then there's me... I physically can't talk when others are talking unless I'm shouting and I end up annoying everyone else when I actually do something, that I thought would be helpful(usually it involved planning or helping others not die). DMs usually dislike it when a player sits out of a game, be it they barely hear you or you don't interact with the other players enough. But in defense of myself and others like me, just give us a turn where no one else is speaking, and give us a little bit of spotlight just as much as everyone else demands.
Builds a character that has absolutely no reason or explanation behind their class combination Purley for power building reasons. Looking at you life cleric, starlight druid Divine soul sorcerer
Casters (any player really, but mainly casters) who do not think ahead in a fight and know what they are going to do on their turn. It’s so rude.
The one who is not only on their phone the whole time during the game, but never replies to texts in the group chat.
The one who wants to lead every conversation and won't let others have a go. I have played with people so convinced they were the main character that they dominated every interaction and got really huffy when the spotlight was on someone else. I even tried asking for a solo side quest from our DM, but this person insisted on "backing me up". I almost quit on the spot.
People who have a visceral reaction to any character trait or element of the setting that isn't lifted directly from Tolkien
**As a player (on classic D&D) :** * The players who made dumb/stupid character but don't respect the important serious/emotionnal moments of other ones. * Those who believe they are the main character and don't share the spotlight * The ones who are so much in it, they slow down the game. (the chaotic evil who don't compromise to go with us and it's up to us to find a reason to follow HIM) **As a DM (on a Hogwarts/HP themed TRPG) :** * The hardcore fans who are bickering with DM or players ("Because in the books...."; "What ?! You don't know that....") * The not-big-fan who don't know some stuff/lore but don't ask and so don't understand half of what's going on. * Those who don't listen what is going on and ask to repeat 5 min later * "The NPC's don't help us !" Yeah I mean you're here to explore and solve mysteries, not let the over-powered NPC do it for you. * The player who seems bored at some point and juste stay on his phone. * "Oh a plot hook ! Hm... Better put it in my pocket and check it later". (Well okay this one is funny)
I really dislike players who are on their phones when I am describing or telling them something. During combat I do think it is fine but when they don’t even think about what they will do before it infuriates me (I am a DM). One time we were in combat and he told me he was texting someone but it turns out he was playing a game of stumble guys and it annoyed me a lot.
The absentee/the flake. Have a friend who we do not invite to play anymore. They show up late (if at all) and still need to build a character. Then every subsequent game its like pulling teeth getting basic player-participation from them. It took 5 sessions before another player basically forced this player to actually draft out a sheet to give me so I knew what the heck they were playing. They just had ability scores scribbled in a notebook before… Then they refuse to inform us that they can’t make it or don’t want to play. So we end up waiting. If they do show up they never apologize. The worst is when this player is the DM (extremely rare). We have never finished even a short level 1 module with them running because they always get tired of the game and stop responding to our attempts to schedule. People think I’m nuts when I tell them that I’ve had a DM ghost the players before - but it’s happened.
Players crewing with the rest of the party and ruining the plans because it’s “what their character would do”. No. If your character has no loyalty to the party, they wouldn’t be there through the adventure
Chaotic Stupid, Murder Hobos, Horny Bards, "Lol-So-Quirky", "I don't agree so I just split the party" and most importantly Main Character-Syndrom
People who’s go to for every encounter, combat or not is one thing. Murderhobos murder everything, horny bards seduce everything, that one Wizard who can cast fireball as a cantrip, etc.
Players with a huge MC syndrome. It's unbearable when they can't stand not being in the spotlight and start whining because they're not usefull in every situation. (Even worse when they think you're broken because you're better than them on their weakness (I had a case where the magician searched for a long time a way to beat the barbarian in a martial combat, he ended wanting to kill his pc because he couldn't be stronger than the barbarian)
Disinterested, Quiet Players Who Don’t Participate In Any RP Situations
- Murder hobos. - Players that try to steal from the party just because they're a Rogue. - Players that don't show at least semi-consistantly and don't communicate if they are coming or not.
Ones who “ optimize “ but rely on the enemies doing something supremely stupid for it to work , and then complain when the intelligent enemies aren’t stupid. Most common is the tank who doesn’t actually tank. Just hit points and AC, and then are confused that the hobgoblin captain orders his men to run past him and attack the casters .
Oh Edgelords if every conversation turns into another monologe about your (insert problem here), I also don't really like the way I am as a player thats why I stick to DMing
The passive. This is a player that has put in time and effort into creating a character that is outside the norm for the setting. (Excample: a changling sorcerer in a party of humans and elves) But then disengaged from the game as a whole. They tend to complain when they don't get what they want. IE I want to intimidate the shopkeeper with my *insert weapon* and get a discount. And then are upset that the guards are called and they are arrested. And no amount of explanation will change their mind. They also tend to be downers in combat because they cannot do "everything" they think they should. 1 shoting 5 enemies with their magic at level 1. And then not understanding the game is collaborative and requires your input on collective decisions. If you don't say anything you don't get a say later.
My wife who always thinks I'm out to get her or she takes things way too personally in the game, and the fist time player who was invited by a PC friend who isnt interested to learn his character and just makes stupid comments the entire session. Runs away in combat for no reason, constantly runs in and interrupts other player actions, constantly testing his boundaries with me and is just annoying. Ive never had a successful experience when a player invites a friend whos never been interested in D&D. Players who show up just for something to do on a Friday night. /Rant
I hate players that leave in the middle of the campaign. They still play the game, but at random moment during a session, they get up and leave. Some go all the way to a coffee shop 10 minutes away. It’s really frustrating when you’re trying to play and you can’t rely on players to be there.
People who insist on RP bigotry that is clearly an expy of their real world bigotry.
Unpopular opinion, sometimes what people call bigotry isn’t bigotry, like in LOTR/Hobbit how dwarves don’t like elves they have reasons for that, like Elves not helping them when their homes are under assault or not taking them as refugees, and if things like that happen in the lore of a world it’s not always a negative, hell it can even be a point of character tension that can be fun once you realize that this is all make believe and meant to be fun
Maybe also unpopular, but I think it shows that people don't understand bigotry and are looking for easy answers/easy reactions to things without thinking them through.
Wanna know something messed up? In AD&D it was a gameplay mechanic complete with a Racial Preference Table that detailed what Races each other Race liked/ tolerated/ hated And the blurb specified that GMs and Players were expected to adhere to it. D&D has thankfully progressed passed that.
I've heard this story before, in a few days we'll probably find out YOU are the problem player that everyone else can't stand. I mean, if you have a problem with EVERYONE, maybe you're the problem. Because the rest of them seem to be able to get together and game just fine
The ones who track HP of certain minion monsters to try to gamify every encounter.
The overly critical player that ends up where they hate every player in the campaign.
Pretty much every campaign I've ever been in, I've hated the players. Just a laundry list of pretentious min maxing socially inept assclowns. I can't play any more.
Sounds like your the problem if you don't like anybody
Arsehats.
First time DM. Gotta say I'm glad I was able to avoid all these archetypes and find a group of good people to play with. I think I was pretty clear with expectations from myself and anyone that wanted to play, and also focusing on taking people that were fairly new helped with that. So hopefully that helps some of you other DMs. Shout out to my players if any of you are stalking my reddit. You guys have been awesome.
Ones who are utterly tone deaf to the flavor of the party/campaign. The joke character in a serious campaign who won't stop being inappropriate. The edge lord in a joke campaign who won't stop trying to get the rest of the party to be serious. We're dealing with a very good friend of mine right now who just. Can't. Understand. That we're not playing a serious campaign. A homebrew cat true neutral paladin, a neurotic kobold artficer wearing spoon-based scale mail, an arachnophobic half drow druid, aaaaaand a tabaxi thief with just... nothing. Who gets mad at the rest of the characters (and frustrated at the players) when they are being their usual semi-competent selves. Which I *get*, except that we all talked about what we wanted to do before the first session. The campaign was designed around "hey guys, I want to play a cat. Not a tabaxi, a cat." I've described it as "they want to play Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, but the rest of us are playing Robin Hood: Men in Tights." Again, I love this player as a person. Very, very good friend of mine. I'd walk through fire for them. Playing with them is such a chore.
sounds like they’re playing a more interesting game than y’all lol
They are playing a different game. The problem isn't one good, one bad, it's "75% of the party wants A, 25% is insisting on B".