I played with a group in a weekly game, and we played for like four years, and nobody would choose spells that required a saving throw, because the DM never ever failed saves. We all knew what he was doing, but we never accused him of fudging his dice rolls.

I don't ask for loot, you aren't really immersing yourself when you go "Yo DM hook a man up".

I just found out about this today from D&D shorts vid I saw today. I makes me sad that people can be this horrible to others. There is no hero's in this stories just zero's. Please be kind to each other.

What is this purple mountain from?

theres a story on a similar thread about dragon slayers. it ends when an actual dragon shows up and they slayers dont know what to do

This is how Yaweh rose to prominence

DM rules often tell a story of what they've been through. This one needs to take a few turns as a player or away from the game for his own sanity. I understand this was written during a barbarian rage. I have a set of rules myself that ive never had to (and hope i never have to) enforce. Just a list of clear expectations so that everyone comes to the table knowing what to expect so everyone can enjoy the game. My session zero also includes ways we can as a group talk about what the players expect from me as a DM. This is also the time players can challenge the ground rules if they dont like them and we can discuss changes. They can even place rules and expectations on me the DM. Whoever wrote these rules, you can have a seat at my table anytime.

I'm as much of a loot goblin as the next person but I'm usually the type to ask what I find after an encounter rather than expected a certain item for my character specifically I usually just sell the random items for spare change as it's usually a waste in my eyes to leave those shortbows and swords just lying there

I use a few rules similar to this. People doing things like repeatedly showing up hours late, rolling their dice off the table, getting up for no reason, etc. do get on my nerves. I think some people have kind of utopian expectations based on living a sheltered life and filtering out difficult people long before they even get to the D&D people. If you've never played D&D with a meth addict then you're not in a position to judge me.

I would (after seeing the first 5 of these rules) call that guy unfair so that he leaves

This inspired me to create a character called Cedric Faker that is a "artificer" that appears to be a human using dark cloak and a complete set of armor under it but in reality they are just a group of mimics walking around and his so called "inventions" are just one of the mimics transforming into a random thing while: using an ammulet, drinking a potion or casting a spell

I remember what it reminds me of! Five hitmen story that happened in China some years ago. And yes, they did it four times (and the last one decided to cheat)

If you tell me up front that you don't care about the game being good and don't accept any criticism, I'm leaving and no harm no fault. It's much better than if you declare it when I'm trying to give you some comments after a terrible game

If you are so done with a group that you had to write out 40 something rules like this, you should probably leave the group. At very least go on a hiatus for a bit. Only 3 out comes and I think they're for the better: Dm realizes that maybe he is too harsh, players realize they are too whiny, or everyone is happier separate.

First!

What if you're a Warlock pacted to a Celestial being?

I would love to try D&D.

Had two different warlock pcs. One pretended to be a cleric(pretty normal stuff) and they other pretended to be a world renowned alchemist. He would use bottes of coloured water and pretend the magic was coming from him throwing his potions.

I dont have any sympathy for the guy. He seems like a massive prick on a power trip and im just not up for that. People like different things and play different ways so even as a dm you have to have some level of flexibility. If i had to take a wild guess id say this guy is the problem and am sincerely hoping noone makes the mistake of letting him dm for them

I’d definitely say there are some fair points among these rules (and would guess that part of the blame certainly lies with the players) but the DMs response is also very overboard and unnecessarily aggressive. Like the points about not every session is going to have a mega dungeon or that magic items will be rare are completely fair but there is just an ongoing feeling that he has gone past that to an overly rigid my way or the highway attitude that is just going to make it so nobody has fun and it just drives people away even if some of his points are justified. Some of this is likely just that this list was likely typed up in a heated moment but in that kind of situation it would be better to get it out of your system and then delete or retype it in a more measured response rather than actually sending the rant version. In the end there is a balance to strike between maintaining control and standing by your DM style while still understanding that part of your job as a DM is that the players are supposed to be having fun with your campaign. Being a pushover would be bad but so is being a hard ass that nobody wants to play with. So the best thing to do is take some time to cool off and then calmly address matters finding a balance between what you as a DM want and what will let the players have fun.

My brother if you as an adult play D&D sober you have issues.

I feel if this list had been in a different order an tone more people would be on the DMs side

7. Moving. My first thought here is meta knowledge. If a player move their character around a blind corner, and I start describing the scene they can now see; having them then say they want to undo that movement but then plan out their turn with this newfound knowledge in mind, I'm going to side with the DM. Same for players that move to spots and trigger traps, land in danger zones, trigger opportunity attacks, etc etc.

6. picking up on or ignoring side quests. Sometimes player will simultaneously blunder past heavily telegraphed plot points, and then complain they have nothing to do. Sometimes they can even be explicitly pointed out by the DM and the players will wilfully not engage. To be clear; it's the combination that's the issue: not engaging AND complaining that they don't have things to do. This fits in with some later stuff the DM mentions about the players just wanting to aimlessly wander (exploration/travel) or passing up on small things (fixated on looking for the next mega dungeon), so I'm inclined to think this is linked.

I’ll just play bard. I’ll secretly be a thief, but I’m really just a bard.

5. I view this as a 'role play' vs 'roll play' argument. A player doesn't need to give some in-character immersive shakespearean performance. Just don't do the "I persuade them [rolls] 14, what happens?" As a DM I've seen this a few times, and it's a pain to deal with. It doesn't need to be overly in-depth, just give me something to work with. What's the point you are trying to make, what details did you want to touch on, etc. Give me something I can base the DC off and what type of reactions I'm working with. It can be something like "I bring up the quest we're on for the mayor,, and I want to emphasize if things go well we're going to put in a good word on the guard's behalf". Not in character, no concern over elegant wording, but it gives me as DM details for gauging what the DC should be, if it's something that aligns or opposes what the npc wants, and queues be up for a response. I can even fluff up the details from there to say how elegant/crude the PC was in the narrative based on the result, because I'm not working from a blank slate.

This guy sounds like a major bitch

This is basically the plot of A Practical Guide to Evil. Great webnovel. Recommend the read.

I recently burnt out of DM'ing and honestly a lot of these rules feel like echos of my thoughts. I even asked before I became more jaded for the rules of the table to be followed.

"I am not your friend?" .... yyyyeah, no, this is a DM who has been abused, wheedled, nagged, argued with, taken advantage of, and repeatedly, REPEATEDLY treated like garbage by a very shitty group. But he's also not showing a degree of emotional maturity necessary to be a "good" DM. Whether that is a temporary thing, driven by the extremity to which he's been pushed, a permanent flaw in temperament, or merely the result of never really having had a good D&D experience and thinking that this is all there is, I cannot say. Some of his rules are pure sensibility, pure common courtesy, or reasonable. the "Once you move the mini, it stays there" rule also sounds like someone was trying to fudge their way to the outside of a fireball one too many times.

I think the person who made these rules is just a That Guy DMing for a table of other That Guys

Wyll activities right here

I told my party I was a wizard, and my eldritch blast was a witch's bolt.

sure there are points, but by the tone of the post, both the DM and players need to get kicked by Skarbrand

Unethical to whom in thos case? Dnd worship is already weird. In a world of proven polytheistics, you only worship one God like a sports team? Nah.

pathfinder 2e fixes this

That method is indeed useful, but I'd add a few caveats. Each function need not be served by just one organization or structure. Things can be distributed, particularly in a larger town, but even in a small village. The local militia, for instance, could comprise all able residents who are expected to train and maintain basic arms, even if they're mostly farmers. Yes, they have a commander, but he might also be the local blacksmith, a retired warrior, and his yard serves as their training ground. So, some functions can overlap or be served by the same place. The inn-keeper might also be the local mayor, but she's well aware of the local shady smuggler, and deliberately keeps tabs on his activities, so she can decide what is worth thwarting and what can be let be. By the way, love that coastal village map.

Since I can't edit comments on this, I'll just continue as a second comment. 16. Give a designated time for this, ideally halfway through with a deadline of 10 minutes for this shit. Or, tell them to do it before or after the session. For the former, they can arrive early if they wanna. 17. Give a warning or just set it out for the next session and talk with the player to help change their spell list. Or, alter the spell to help. With divination, make shit vague. 18. Makes sense, but talk with players. Maybe only 2 checks as a softer form of this, but sometimes it makes sense. 19. Absolutely like the rule, but unnecessary punishment. 20. Talking about certain rules in session 0 is ideal for preventing this, however I like the "just fk off" in this context as this shit taken to far is a pain in the ass for everyone involved. 21. Already mentioned this. No need for in-game punishment, just kick em. 22. Talk with players first, and don't hide shit behind super hard skill checks. Hell, just make it so a simple look around does the job. Don't be malicious. 23. Makes sense depending on the setting. Sprinkle in some tiny ones if needed. 24. This shit makes sense. Though a d100 can help. 25. As you said, DM is always right. This can be discussed out of game before the next session or at session 0 if necessary. 26. This hurts to read. 27. Once again, I guess I'm kinda soft, but just give em a single chance and explicitly say what they did wrong when they do it. One time can be a mistake. Twice = kick em. Circumstances matter, and sometimes there are other complications to keep in mind depending on the people involved. They're called exceptions for a reason. 28. Yes, yes, and yes. In a serious campaign, do this. DnD time is for DnD. 29. They're hurt, but yeah those comments are just kick worthy. 30-31. This is called for, though I agree with what you've said on this. However, I'd say it's also on the players to recognize what is reasonable and what is not. No crunching chips all session or messy food. Clean up after yourself. No food near minis and stuff. Set aside a time for eating if necessary. If someone chooses not to at the alloted time, that's on them. 32. Agree with ya on this. 33. Once again, session 0. If there's something that you like, bring it up out of game and talk with the DM privately before putting in the group chat. Their word is final, so be diplomatic and don't argue this shit with your DM. 34. Unnecessary. If it's in-game reasons, talk over it first. 35. Makes sense, however you should have a copy. If they fk up multiple times, just keep their sheet. 36. Perfect. 37. This is, in my opinion, dependent on perspective. If they just want you to not be outright hostile to them, talk about it. Otherwise, yes. 38. Yep, but this should go both ways. 39. Yes this is perfect. Give each player a handheld little whiteboard and some dry erase markers if necessary. 40. Bullshit like this doesn't need punishment. Just give them a chance to fix this, as I mentioned for 39, or kick them if it continues. 41. If you don't have the money to replace what you borrow, why borrow it? You can make do without minis. If you just don't but have the capacity to pay em back, you get kicked. If there's any degree of networking between the community, the person who broke it and could pay gets the great part of this. No DM let's them play the moment they hear of this. 42. This is not only funny as fk, but if it's only one person complaining, they get the privilege of being ignored. If it's half the table, this rule fits perfectly. Hell, just communicate and set up a list of songs outside of game time. 43. Rule 0, but hopefully just no. 44. If someone pushes their luck, this can be a form of karma. However it shouldn't be a rule and used with delicacy and care. That's all folks. TL;DR: Session 0 & communication are key parts to DnD and having fun. Also breaks aren't always enough.

Do you know if anyone elaborated on this story? Like one of the players? As for my opinion on this, I'll go one by one. 1. Makes sense. I've played with people who take forever and been one of them when I first began playing. However, I'd say 3 minutes minimum as some shit can take much longer. 2. First off, put a a straw poll for your party as to whether they want easy, well-balanced, harder, or deadly fights. Backup characters are something I see as being necessary in the first place incase anything happens. This kinda retaliation is unnecessary. 3. I get where it's coming from, but I'd say asking what part is unfair and how they'd change it is good to do first before dismissing it. Don't DM through fear. 4. Funny, but honestly it's better to just write a tally down each time with a seperate thing for each player and if it gets too much, kick em. Not only do you have a solid list of reasonable evidence, you also don't waste energy fighting with them. Be the sponge until the hammer is required. This doesn't mean be a pushover, just don't be super angry or retaliatory. 5. Reasoning is shit, same with the punishment. Honestly, same with the tally thing. If they do it enough times, kick em. 6. This really depends on how obvious you make it. Don't rely on a single queue, but don't give 10+. 5 is a good middle ground, and not all to the same person. If they miss all of your queues, even when they're fkin obvious, it's on them. Also talking over whether it's obvious could help. Perspective is a killer. 7. Ok, I'd say you have 2 per turn and once you commit enough, no take backs. Like no moving 8 tiles, entering line of sight of an enemy and going "oh no" only to take it back more than once every, say, 2-3 turns. If you trigger a trap, no take backs. It's really about the exact circumstances of this. No using this to metagame so you can see what's around the corner. 8. Perfect rule, though it could be worded better. Also, roll out from yourself with at least 2 people watching or it's fkin invalid, and no touching the dice till they need to be rolled again and everyone has seen them. 9. For things like this, session 0 is a good time to figure out the pacing. 10. Makes sense, especially the grudge part. However, it's important not to take it over the top. No death sentence for dissing a king. Just a little stint in jail and a fine. Don't take this overboard. 11. I agree with you on this a lot, but at the same time I enjoy making dungeons so yeah... 12. Session 0 should work this out. I agree heavily with what you said on this. 13-14. No punishment, just add to the tally and get other ways to help them arrive. If this happens 2-3 times, yer out. 15. I'd say this is a good rule, however if the rest of the party is there, just remove their character from the session and kick em the next time it happens.

Nobody should ever be “twiddling their thumbs” at a table, of they are then something is seriously wrong. How I solve it myself is I’ve asked my Drakewarden player if in the case of death the player could assume control of his drake

a character I made is a goblin who thinks he's a wizard, throwing fireball and such (molotov cocktail)

Class by Itself is not a Concrete thing in universe, it is for Game Mechanics, sure! But a Warlock could easily be interpreted as a "Wizard", since even the manual says that a lot of warlock have a nack for learning Obscure and Eldritch Knowledge (or something on thise lines) wich is very akin to most wizard's pursue of knowledge and power over the Material Realm with his Mind, while a Warlock's using his Strwngh of Character, his Will, if you will.

Personally I think you’re being too kind on the DM. I agree, a lot of the rules *in essence* are reasonable and probably come from a party that does not value the game or the DM. But, as you said yourself, most of the criticisms online come for the tone of the “manifesto,” and in my opinion, the tone and subtext suggest not only a DM who isn’t valued by the players, but also a DM who is naturally adversarial and extremely controlling. I think they would have a really hard time finding a group that suited them, even if they had a whole handful of players ready to join with a lot more buy-in. What it comes down to, is that he comes off as an asshole, and I don’t think the context is enough to dismiss it as a one-off thing. Bad DM. Bad players.