344
Try me, bitch. (startrek.website)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/rpgmemes@ttrpg.network
56 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -14 points 2 years ago (1 child)

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

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

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

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

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 25 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Just in case this wasn't clear, we're talking about a meme. There's no "full context" behind it, it's a quick setup for a laugh. You can't expect to take the meme at face value, that the party became muderhobo out of nowhere and that bahamut also comes out of nowhere because the DM is a bitch.

    In a real situation, the more likely thing to happen is that the many other things the DM threw to get the players back in line failed, so it's time to bring the big guns. It's likely that the group had a talk out of the game discussing their situation and their possible future. Likely being the keyword here because, again, you're assuming that this comes out of nowhere, but there's no "real" table being discussed

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

    Because it gives the players an opportunity to acknowledge that in game.

    TLDR - you're missing the point because you're assuming a lot of stuff that isn't even hinted at anywhere.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -16 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

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

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

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

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I don’t think I’m the one assuming a lot of stuff

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

    2 assumptions here, one that "nobody said..." and also one that the DM "chose to trick the players".

    More importantly, there's your implicit assumption that a chaotic murderhobo party facing bahamut in disguise can only be the result of "things going wrong", that "someone" is making the experience bad for the DM. This is pretty clear from this bit:

    Step two is removing a player from the game, possibly yourself

    And how you're replying elsewhere: "if it's bad, just leave". To reach such conclusion you have to assume that:

    • "something is going wrong"
    • nobody talked about it out of the game
    • nobody did anything else to try avoiding the "wrong" situation
    • there were zero "warnings" (nothing else happening in game could be said to be a hint of escalation of a problem to godly level)
    • all players are completely oblivious to any traps or tricks the DM could set up
    • setting up bahamut in disguise like is meant solely to kill the characters, ignoring the many different possibilities as to why he could show up ("teach a lesson", give a warning, setup for plot)

    There is never enough buildup to justify introducing an OP enemy to guaranteed kill your players as a punishment. Even if there was, you should have left the game long before that point, and should leave the game now instead of firing that big gun.

    Just because you cannot think of an escalation that leads to a god showing up in a game doesn't mean that nobody else can. Just because you can only see this setup as "rock falls, everyone dies" doesn't mean that everybody else will use it exactly for that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -9 points 2 years ago (1 child)

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

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

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yes, the party all snapped at the same time and started murder hoboing and it definitely wasn't talked about before hand by the party or the dm.

    Listen, it sounds like you've been traumatized by some passive aggressive dm. I cannot think of a reason you're so passionate about this.

    It really feels like you'd be a part of the "doms don't need aftercare" crowd too.

    One of the closer examples of this actually happening is a party was underneath an alchemist shop in the sewers which I said smelled of sulphur. The newest person to the party their first move down there was fireball. I literally said "are you sure?" While giving him the look. Anyways most people made their dex saves and it was a lesson in fuck around find out. They became a great player and meshed really well with the game. But saying something and doing something are two different things. I told them before this event I will reward them for being smart and punish for not being observant. You need this ability to do things like this in game in order to smoothly, without breaking the flow, push the players in the right direction.

    You don't have to be in that style of game, you also have the ability to ask the DM how they want to run the game.

    There are games out there for any type of player and dm. If you think it's the dm's JOB to make you happy then I do not want to be a part of any game you're in. This is a group game.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -6 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

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

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

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

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

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    If it got to the point that the party was willing to twist the narrative to kill the entire campaign, they should have already left.

    Then why are you so passionate about this if you don't have experience? I have experience both as a player when another player goes all murder hobo, and a GM when people have gone full murder hobo. It isn't fun, there was always talk before hand and the GM tries to not break flow of game. I'm not "defense of vindictive DMing" I've just been in plenty of complex situations similar to A NINETEEN WORD MEME that you are refusing to understand that people with experience are laughing at, not because "being mean is good" but people trying to make the best of a shit situation they've been PUT in.

    It's a perfect example of what I have been talking about.

    DM explains expectations
    Player ignores everything
    DM does in game thing to enforce expectations

    My experience is definitely people wanting to play/GM with friends and I haven't ever directly paid/been pain for sessions. So when I say job I'm definitely implying a soul crushing 9-5 and not a session between friends. It's a group activity, everyone should be trying. If it is solely the DM's job to keep the peace, it is a failing game.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

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

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

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

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

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    You really haven't experienced this have you. I usually recommend the German version of funny games because Americans don't recognize the actors, and it's easier to just put the movie as "just people" in their heads. The whole movie is about using social expectations in order to torture and kill a family.

    If you get up and leave when people do this, you're probably going to become unfavorable and not invited back.

    If you just rip out the role playing to address every small thing people will just stop role playing, and become murderhobos anyways.

    It's good to go over the game in a kind of want/will/won't list. Because sometimes in order to get what you want out of a game you need to go through things you're only willing to do. To me, it seems like you've been saying this whole time "if you don't do what you WANT, then quit" which would explain why you've "barely ever been a player."

    You've been screaming, in not direct ways, a lack of social experience with things of this nature. I wish you the best of luck. And as a recommendation, try not to get upset at a nineteen word meme that you haven't experienced. There is a good reason why the most comments in this, besides you, have been people telling you that you are wrong.

    Unless you explain to me why you're so passionate about this, I will not care to respond. I hope you have a lot of fun in the games you play and I hope you get the best out of them. I hope you have a wonderful Sunday, I'm going to go play a game where the DM wants me to back stab the party.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

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

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

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

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

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Bro, who hurt you?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •