[D&D] Warning signs: how to tell your DM is problematic.
Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:43 pm
So you're wanting to play some D&D, but don't want to waste your time with someone that for whatever reason doesn't get it. There's plenty of examples of what happens when early detection doesn't occur and you find out the hard way.
Naturally, this is a suboptimal use of your time. And since 4.Fail and the Paizils have pulled a lot of... suboptimal players (I do not mean character BUILDING skills) it is all the more important to block out the trash, so that the quality players can actually enjoy themselves. So, this thread is designed to teach you what the red flags are. Many of you already know this stuff, but clearly not all and in any case it makes for an easy reference.
1: Obvious one first. Core only is ALWAYS a warning sign, UNLESS it's a newbie game. In which case you shouldn't join anyways, because you aren't a newbie. Even if it isn't predicated on the blatantly false assumption the game is more and not less balanced this way (it usually is) just the fact your viable options are cut down to around... 3-5, and there are typically about that many people in the party still means there's not a lot of things you can actually play. Well, maybe if you like red shirts.
2: Low magic and/or wealth is almost always a warning sign. It demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding about the system and will essentially always lead to massive problems. Note that I only said almost always on the extremely unlikely chance (we're talking 0.000001% here) it was possible to make that work. Many of the following examples will be different variations of 'tries to make system do something it's not made for, displaying blatant ignorance that manifests in other areas as well' so most of the other examples will be shorter.
3: Lack of Genre Savviness, either as a DM, or as is displayed by the characters is often a warning sign. This means you'll get shit like people living in ordinary castles with armies of mook peons despite the fact this is neither a safe base nor an effective means of waging war. It gets worse when applied to IC specific things, like intelligent villains being dumbasses. Bonus points if the justification is something like 'movies are like that'. Fuck movies, make some credible and intelligent threats. Kkkthxbye.
4: Disconnects between the rules of the world and the way the world actually works. See also: Forgotten Realms anything. This is always a warning sign, because it turns the entire campaign into Giant Frog.
5: If the DM bans 'Spell Compendium' specifically, this is almost always a warning sign. The reason being that 95% of the time when that book is blocked specifically, it's because of some vague claim of 'overpowered spells'... yet the Complete series, Races series, Weather series etc is in. And everything or almost everything in the SC is a reprint from one of those books! Thus it demonstrates phenomenal ignorance, along with a propensity for kneejerk bullshit which means even if you don't care about the SC, it still has undesirable effects in other areas. Of course, if they actually knew what they were talking about they could simply select the problem spells, block those, and let the rest in. But they don't. Which is why they do a little feel good measure that does nothing but removes the consolidated source. And oh yeah, most of the original prints were stronger than the SC version. So whatever problems concerned them they just made worse.
6: If the DM bans Tome of Battle specifically, this is almost always a warning sign for similar reasons. Namely, kneejerking. If made to elaborate, this will be proven true again and again, as it is very rare for the reason to be something other than some variation of 'They're better than Fighters' as if this were a bad thing. And/or complaints about 'anime'. I guess because mundanes can actually participate in most anime, and indeed often pose as credible opponents in many of them?
6b: The DM bans the Expanded Psionics Handbook specifically. This is very similar to the ToB issue. Similar to comparing a warblade as better than the fighter, they'll complain how psions are such better blasters than the wizard. They fail to realize real reasons spells are broken and they fail to see that blasting still sucks.
And really, the only reason a psion is a "better" blaster than a wizard is that you can do a better (easier) job of it if you're a newbie. Wizards do better if you try and know where to look. This 'better' is required to be an actually functional character, therefore psion blasters are a trap build anyways. (RobbyPants)
7: Almost any ban of a splatbook class not already mentioned qualifies, usually because of some vague generic 'it's too powerful' claim. Except that if it's a caster it's either weaker than a Cleric/Druid/Wizard, or derives its strength by stealing their tricks (Archivist/Artificer). And if it isn't, it is an improvement about two thirds of the time, and in such cases the boost is well needed.
8: Whining about HP damage in any amount. It proves the DM does not even grasp fundamental concepts like 'blasting sucks' and 'critical existence failure' and therefore cannot be trusted to make sound judgments regarding the game. They will then often prove you right by not realizing the awesomeness of Spells That Fucking Kill People. Because it's not Fireball.
9: DM uses the word 'storyteller' in reference to himself in a non joking manner. There is an 85% chance this is a code word for railroader. GTFO. ASAP.
So, any other ways to easily identify problematic DMs so as to be able to optimize game time?
Edit: More.
10: The DM frowns on taking multiple classes or prestige classes to their "sweet point" (say Barbarian 2, Fighter 2, Ranger 1 in 3.0) or outright bans this.
This is a clear sign he doesn't understand that casters do not need multiclassing, have a stronger selection of prestige classes that are worth taking all the way through as opposed to dipped into and are in the better position to start with. Any DM who will let you play a Druid 20 but will not let you play a Paladin/Samurai/Fighter/Devoted Defender/Templar/Planar Champion doesn't understand the game.
Solution: Play a straight Cleric, Druid or Wizard and roleplay all your spells as martial feats. (Murtak)
11: The DM in question has started a dozen campaigns in recent memory, all of which have ended abruptly with no resolution. Or the DM has played in a dozen campaigns in recent memory, all of which he dropped out of abruptly (because his gnat-sized attention span got distracted by a shiny piece of tinfoil). Both are sure signs anything involving him will end in abrupt failure and that you should not waste your time. (hogarth)
12: DMs who cannot read the fucking manual. Not reading the rules properly turns the encounter into a joke or a trainwreck. Granted sometimes the statblocks are objectively unclear (see: Roper). Making a mistake is not a warning sign unless it happens frequently. Refusing to learn from it is a strong one though. (Judging Eagle)
13: DMs that change the rules, but will not tell you what the new rules are. This is a practical assurance the DM is just fucking with you for the lulz, and you should leave immediately. (Judging Eagle)
14: For that matter, DMs that won't tell you what the rules are in the first place. This deserves a separate entry because it refers to things that don't involve changing the rules but do involve multiple choice, like knowing what the character creation rules are. This almost always means they aren't telling you what books are allowed or how stats are being done or whatever because the answer is something you would not want to hear, therefore the DM is trying to trick you into wasting your time so when you figure it out you might be compelled to stay and attempt to salvage it. Not only should you leave immediately if he refuses to answer this question, but I strongly recommend the Folding Chair of Salvation.
15: DM uses houserules pertaining to Critical Fumbles of any kind. Hell, even the Critical Successes are a dire warning to run away. But the former is especially telling, as it illustrates a lack of understanding of Iterative Probability and that therefore these will fuck over the players hard at every turn, and more so when they are supposed to be more competent. Alternately he does know that, and is doing it anyways. (Torko)
Naturally, this is a suboptimal use of your time. And since 4.Fail and the Paizils have pulled a lot of... suboptimal players (I do not mean character BUILDING skills) it is all the more important to block out the trash, so that the quality players can actually enjoy themselves. So, this thread is designed to teach you what the red flags are. Many of you already know this stuff, but clearly not all and in any case it makes for an easy reference.
1: Obvious one first. Core only is ALWAYS a warning sign, UNLESS it's a newbie game. In which case you shouldn't join anyways, because you aren't a newbie. Even if it isn't predicated on the blatantly false assumption the game is more and not less balanced this way (it usually is) just the fact your viable options are cut down to around... 3-5, and there are typically about that many people in the party still means there's not a lot of things you can actually play. Well, maybe if you like red shirts.
2: Low magic and/or wealth is almost always a warning sign. It demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding about the system and will essentially always lead to massive problems. Note that I only said almost always on the extremely unlikely chance (we're talking 0.000001% here) it was possible to make that work. Many of the following examples will be different variations of 'tries to make system do something it's not made for, displaying blatant ignorance that manifests in other areas as well' so most of the other examples will be shorter.
3: Lack of Genre Savviness, either as a DM, or as is displayed by the characters is often a warning sign. This means you'll get shit like people living in ordinary castles with armies of mook peons despite the fact this is neither a safe base nor an effective means of waging war. It gets worse when applied to IC specific things, like intelligent villains being dumbasses. Bonus points if the justification is something like 'movies are like that'. Fuck movies, make some credible and intelligent threats. Kkkthxbye.
4: Disconnects between the rules of the world and the way the world actually works. See also: Forgotten Realms anything. This is always a warning sign, because it turns the entire campaign into Giant Frog.
5: If the DM bans 'Spell Compendium' specifically, this is almost always a warning sign. The reason being that 95% of the time when that book is blocked specifically, it's because of some vague claim of 'overpowered spells'... yet the Complete series, Races series, Weather series etc is in. And everything or almost everything in the SC is a reprint from one of those books! Thus it demonstrates phenomenal ignorance, along with a propensity for kneejerk bullshit which means even if you don't care about the SC, it still has undesirable effects in other areas. Of course, if they actually knew what they were talking about they could simply select the problem spells, block those, and let the rest in. But they don't. Which is why they do a little feel good measure that does nothing but removes the consolidated source. And oh yeah, most of the original prints were stronger than the SC version. So whatever problems concerned them they just made worse.
6: If the DM bans Tome of Battle specifically, this is almost always a warning sign for similar reasons. Namely, kneejerking. If made to elaborate, this will be proven true again and again, as it is very rare for the reason to be something other than some variation of 'They're better than Fighters' as if this were a bad thing. And/or complaints about 'anime'. I guess because mundanes can actually participate in most anime, and indeed often pose as credible opponents in many of them?
6b: The DM bans the Expanded Psionics Handbook specifically. This is very similar to the ToB issue. Similar to comparing a warblade as better than the fighter, they'll complain how psions are such better blasters than the wizard. They fail to realize real reasons spells are broken and they fail to see that blasting still sucks.
And really, the only reason a psion is a "better" blaster than a wizard is that you can do a better (easier) job of it if you're a newbie. Wizards do better if you try and know where to look. This 'better' is required to be an actually functional character, therefore psion blasters are a trap build anyways. (RobbyPants)
7: Almost any ban of a splatbook class not already mentioned qualifies, usually because of some vague generic 'it's too powerful' claim. Except that if it's a caster it's either weaker than a Cleric/Druid/Wizard, or derives its strength by stealing their tricks (Archivist/Artificer). And if it isn't, it is an improvement about two thirds of the time, and in such cases the boost is well needed.
8: Whining about HP damage in any amount. It proves the DM does not even grasp fundamental concepts like 'blasting sucks' and 'critical existence failure' and therefore cannot be trusted to make sound judgments regarding the game. They will then often prove you right by not realizing the awesomeness of Spells That Fucking Kill People. Because it's not Fireball.
9: DM uses the word 'storyteller' in reference to himself in a non joking manner. There is an 85% chance this is a code word for railroader. GTFO. ASAP.
So, any other ways to easily identify problematic DMs so as to be able to optimize game time?
Edit: More.
10: The DM frowns on taking multiple classes or prestige classes to their "sweet point" (say Barbarian 2, Fighter 2, Ranger 1 in 3.0) or outright bans this.
This is a clear sign he doesn't understand that casters do not need multiclassing, have a stronger selection of prestige classes that are worth taking all the way through as opposed to dipped into and are in the better position to start with. Any DM who will let you play a Druid 20 but will not let you play a Paladin/Samurai/Fighter/Devoted Defender/Templar/Planar Champion doesn't understand the game.
Solution: Play a straight Cleric, Druid or Wizard and roleplay all your spells as martial feats. (Murtak)
11: The DM in question has started a dozen campaigns in recent memory, all of which have ended abruptly with no resolution. Or the DM has played in a dozen campaigns in recent memory, all of which he dropped out of abruptly (because his gnat-sized attention span got distracted by a shiny piece of tinfoil). Both are sure signs anything involving him will end in abrupt failure and that you should not waste your time. (hogarth)
12: DMs who cannot read the fucking manual. Not reading the rules properly turns the encounter into a joke or a trainwreck. Granted sometimes the statblocks are objectively unclear (see: Roper). Making a mistake is not a warning sign unless it happens frequently. Refusing to learn from it is a strong one though. (Judging Eagle)
13: DMs that change the rules, but will not tell you what the new rules are. This is a practical assurance the DM is just fucking with you for the lulz, and you should leave immediately. (Judging Eagle)
14: For that matter, DMs that won't tell you what the rules are in the first place. This deserves a separate entry because it refers to things that don't involve changing the rules but do involve multiple choice, like knowing what the character creation rules are. This almost always means they aren't telling you what books are allowed or how stats are being done or whatever because the answer is something you would not want to hear, therefore the DM is trying to trick you into wasting your time so when you figure it out you might be compelled to stay and attempt to salvage it. Not only should you leave immediately if he refuses to answer this question, but I strongly recommend the Folding Chair of Salvation.
15: DM uses houserules pertaining to Critical Fumbles of any kind. Hell, even the Critical Successes are a dire warning to run away. But the former is especially telling, as it illustrates a lack of understanding of Iterative Probability and that therefore these will fuck over the players hard at every turn, and more so when they are supposed to be more competent. Alternately he does know that, and is doing it anyways. (Torko)