DnD Player Won't Stop Flirting With His REAL SISTER | r/rpghorrorstories

[@KamakazeTaco]

I love that all of these stories are just "I just stood there and did nothing while the DM and other players set my character sheet on fire and kicked my cat! AITA?"

I mean, when everybody they've played with obviously thinks so, I get why one would start to wonder. But the thing he missed, likely due to autism, was that the DM had a crush on him and used that princess NPC to try to hit on him... and when he shot her (as the princess) down, she got pissed! ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

[@ScrubbyOwl]

its almost as if theres almost always two sides to the story and people just cut out things that they did wrong to farm pity points on reddit...

[@TrueDarkSparda]

One day Doge is gonna read something so incredibly fucked up, it'll cut to him looking shocked and then wordlessly cut to cats.

[@Nintendoggy]

​@Big Box SEND IN THE CATS! 😂

[@seto_kaiba_]

IT HAPPENED! kzbin.info/www/bejne/on7Ig6Bjj9hmf80&ab_channel=DnDDoge

[@GodOfPlague]

And lo a few days later it happened

[@flamiaminu5536]

I can sympathize a lot with the second OP. It's so shitty to be kicked out of a group of "friends" over vague unconsequential bullshit, especially without talking about it first like, you know, friends? And I say that out of experience.

[@Cailan_Mors]

Either she's in denial about her brother's behaviour and blocks it out, or she's actually into it.

[@Nozerone]

If I had to guess, the pally wasn't bothered by her brother's roll play because she has long sense started to deny/ignore the signs her brother puts out that he is into her. A lot of people would rather deny that a sibling is sexually attracted to them than accept even a slight possibility the sibling might be, let alone obviously is. For some it's easier to deny such things, because accepting something like that as truth can greatly change the relationship the person has with the other person, and if she accepts that her brother is into her then that could sour what ever relationship she has with him. She doesn't want to have a bad relationship with her brother though, cause she loves her brother like a sibling would, so in her mind it's better to ignore it and pretend the truth isn't real.

[@sabin97]

maybe she's into it. but she keeps up appearances in front of others.

[@Nozerone]

@@sabin97 That is also a possibility, and she is just much better at hiding it.

[@sabin97]

@@Nozerone if she wasnt into it, the story would have mentioned her being repulsed....

[@valivali8104]

@@sabin97 or she is so used to it that she doesn’t realize that something is wrong. Or family is subtlely abusive, so she is lying to herself to avoid losing her whole family. Being groomed and abused isn’t impossible either... 😰

[@sabin97]

@@valivali8104 and yet not a single person was able to notice that she was even the slightest bit uncomfortable.......that seems suspicious. seems far more likely that she's into it.

[@androzani]

“There was no cults, no assassinations, no resolutions, just…” “…Savings are blooming at Hobby Lobby.” Sometimes ADs are the best. 😂

[@benwagner5089]

Story 3: The DM specifically told the players there'd be no time-limited quests, and told them that gold would be a scarcer commodity. I can see where OP would be fine saving his gold and not get a horse (or as other people have said, get a common wagon instead). If it was worded more as "you'll become encumbered thus you need a pack animal to carry your stuff," then the OP would be more of an a-hole. The DM should definitely not threatened to kill off the player, even in jest. As for thinking that the other players would ride ahead and he'd have to catch up to them later in the day, that's not how it would work, in game or in reality. The Oregon Trail was walked, armies moved at the speed of the infantry and the supply train, etc. In a DND game, leaving a person behind means they have to deal with any encounters by themselves, not as a party.

[@vexxama]

“You’re gaslighting my friends” Blocks, rest of party blocks, no explanations given to player. Anyone else think the DM lied to get the rest of the players on board? Even the one player that didn’t block them went on to block them just for asking why

[@mads2357]

Yeah I was looking for someone else saying it in the comments. It seems very likely since everyone reacted so quickly and decisively. Especially the block after asking what was done seems like a "if they pretend they didn't even do X then I have nothing to say" kind of block.

[@informitas0117]

DM is projecting, but it also seems like the player could have been an edgelord with a background like that but that's just a hunch and I could be fully wrong.

[@AlbinoMothDragon]

​@@informitas0117I doubt it, you can explain to an Edge lord that they're being edgy without blocking them for asking.

[@Phoenixoflife56]

In the last story the DM was the Ahole especially if they knew that op was new because they handled the situation wrong most likely failing to mention that it it makes their life harder for op to not have a steed which leads back to the decision of the DM to try to get everyone to buy a horse despite it being unnecessary because he didn’t have timed quests.

[@Stardweller1]

As a D&D player and an aspiring writer, the whole thing about undoing the backstory ticked me off. It’s like taking away the character’s whole identity. I would leave and try to find another game where I could play the same character without fear of their past being invalidated.

[@notoriouswhitemoth]

'It's a lawful good act randomly killing Drow in the street because Drow are inherently evil' That's literally stochastic terrorism.

[@mattlazarus2489]

That last story, DM went overboard with the threat just because he didn't want a horse. OP could just ride with someone else. Not wanting a horse doesn't make him the a-hole with such a simple solution.

[@Zetact_]

The entire party buying individual horses instead of just getting a wagon is also stupid. Especially since apparently his motivation was not wanting to spend the money whereas there is a significant economic benefit to having a wagon instead of just ramming stuff in your character's backpack. But also the line of thinking of "the DM said we won't be met with pressing time limits" is also pretty bad metagaming, especially since most characters would also prefer to ride at least a more economically viable animal like a mule than having to cover their feet with blisters and show up everywhere exhausted.

[@rynowatcher]

It is making a player not pay for something literally every other character had to pay. That is a bit unfair. It is like a character not buying food while everyone else in the game is ticking off consumed rations. The dm might have been setting up for a mounted combat encounter which would leave a character out or at a hopeless disadvantage.

[@cmhsky]

I think a better solution would have been the party coming across an attacked caravan or something where they come upon. You know free horses. An exchange for fighting off bandits or whatever

[@rynowatcher]

@@cmhsky it is basically the dm charging everyone else for something and giving a player a thing for free. The group might resent they have to pay 5 gold for passage to ride a boat versus one player gets to ride for free because that is the only way you can get them on the boat. The rest of the party is the first to call him an a$$ in his own telling of this. Frankly, it is very meta gaming reasons why he does not want a steed in the first place. "The dm said they would not make us lose a quest because we got there too late, so it did not matter," might break the immersion of the dm/other players.

[@cmhsky]

@@rynowatcher no. I meant if horses are going to be a requirement. A better idea would've been some quest where the players end up with mounts. I'm just not understanding how suddenly making travel more complicated adds to the experience. It's not like new places were suddenly available, or taking care of horses was a new aspect of gameplay?

[@TheMightyBattleSquid]

Oof that vindictive dm story hit a bit close to home. Just lost a "friend" group myself due to a similar situation. 😅 Feels like a bad break up because I opened up and got more social than I do with most acquaintances I've had in the past. Hope OP is doing better than I am.

[@rhysproudmourne1646]

There’s a hundred and one ways they could’ve resolved the steed issue. The DM could’ve had a horse as part of a quest reward, they could’ve rescued a wounded animal, they could’ve found a creature that had lost its owner, they could’ve had a wolf animal come upon the party when they bedded down for the night… I mean, this could’ve easily been solved with a Role play opportunity. Wtf…

[@AnonPer]

On the "Need for Steed" story, if I were the DM I would have had a group discussion on "So how are we playing this?" on making sure the horseless headman keeps up with the party. Someone drags him along? He rides "backseat" on another player's horse? Side car-t?

[@UnholyCameraman]

If I have a quote about gaslighting, it would be from my own words, "No sword nor bullet can pierce the most vulnerable part of our body, and no pen can instruct us on how to be truly invulnerable. Only educated acts of cruelty could push us to our lowest point overtime, and then bury us alive at a painfully slow rate." Gaslighting (for those who don't know): A subtle, slow-burn manipulation tactic--usually employed by narcissists and domestic abusers--that involves fabricating inconsistencies in facts that the subject believed and fictitious guilt to erode the subject's confidence in their ability to know right and wrong, or what is or is not normal. The frequent goal of this tactic is to "win" arguments before they start and to prevent the subject from leaving, reporting them for unlawful activities or acting out against them when offended. To all who learned this; to accuse someone frivolously of gaslighting is to expect the same scrutiny in return. As with other atrocious claims.

[@KatarnandKanos]

Redditors figure out what gaslighting is 2023 challenge (impossible)

[@dragowolfraven3806]

He was hitting on his actual sister? Wtf dude?😛

[@gr_pillar]

Maybe they are from Alabama

[@ST-RTheProtogen]

Yo what's that emoji for 0-0

[@WTFisTingispingis]

Fucking Targaryens.

[@teirdalin]

@@gr_pillar Exactly what I was about to say. lol

[@Bladezeromus]

​@@gr_pillar As a guy from Alabama, I was waiting for this comment.

[@PrideOfFantasy100]

Story 1: Have a friend who's brother is like this... It definitely seems like he has control issues and probably was abusive in more ways than one in her life. Probably has issues not dealt with in his life. Sister is probably in denial or afraid of him or both, though we lack enough info to say for sure. Second story just seems to have a vindictive DM. Even despite that, killing a character while the character isn't there is just scummy. Though this seems to be lacking information here. At the very least, DM should have practiced better communication and been more forthcoming with their intents so they could have discussed it beforehand. The last story does seem like an Everyone Sucks story. DM should have handled it better by explaining like Doge said, though. But OP has to pick what hill they are willing to die on and that doesn't seem like one.

[@theasinclaire52]

Subscribed! Also, please tell the kitties we love them and give them pets.

[@stephenadams8712]

Last story if something is important for your players to have give it to them in this case have the party wipe out a bandit camp and the players can claim the bandits' steeds

[@DisneyChar]

But then they'd have even more money the dm would have to counter balance

[@MegamanXV0]

The last story, the OP was not the asshole, 100%. He said in the post that they had limited gold, if it was so relative to the story, the DM should hand them the horses or... The two that didn't want to could double up, as you mentioned. Hell, they could even stop by a ranch while feeding their horses and an NPC could make mention that the has two spare horses for the two that didn't. Probably making the others feel cheated, but they willingly spent on them and it is just to make sure they keep up. But there could be many hidden reasons they didn't want it. But I still don't think they are an asshole for not. That is just me, though

[@michaelk7007]

Agreed. The 30-yr DM that called them out advising they were an asshole in the comments was even worse. You can give them mounts if they NEED mounts. You can even give somebody a war horse that can carry a heavier load, a statue that summons a magical animal or object x amounts of time between rests, or homebrew as needed. The jerk just wants to remove and make gold more scarce than it already is.

[@unluckyone1655]

There's also the spell Find Steed that is a second level spell. If the party has a paladin or a wizard, they can cast the spell, let the character have a steed that will stick around until its not needed anymore/drops to 0 hp and disappears. Voila character has a mount, if that's what the DM is so he'll bent on the party being mounted up. Unless DM is trying to force the party to drop tons of gold on mounts instead of saving up for equipment, then that's kinda dumb

[@maihib821]

@@unluckyone1655 That's the vibe I got from the story, that the DM was hell bent on making spend their limited amount of gold and the rest of the party essentially peer pressured the remaining two players into spending their gold. Rangers, Wizards and Paladins all have means of tracking or acquiring steeds, Monks and Rouges (Depending on the level and/or race) could keep pace with a horse before taking the mobile feat. There was a thousand and one ways that this could have been handled instead of just threatening a new player to the game to do as they are told and spend their gold on something they didn't want to, when from the sounds of it they really didn't need to.

[@pippo17173]

Oh hell no the brother in story one knows exactly what he is doing. I legit worry for the sister because it sounds like she is being groom to accept this.

[@informitas0117]

My guess is that she is in denial.

[@lilliansp4776]

Both op and dm were kind of the a-hole in the last story. DM should have explained the issue not threaten the character. OP should have read the room as it were.

[@DominicEverlot]

I love your cats, when I listen to some of your videos and starting to feel a bit cringe by hearing what characters done to others. Your cats always come to clease me from the cringe.

[@JacobL228]

The DM was definitely the asshole in the last story. You can't just force someone's character to spend money on something they don't want or need, just like you can't force them to choose certain spells or weapons. If the OP didn't want to buy a steed, they might miss out on most of the XP when they take way longer to get there on foot and the battle is already over, but maybe they find something cool or useful on the way there that the others missed because they were rushing to get to the location of a quest without a time limit. Conversely, you could give or sell them magic boots or some other magic item or ability that would let them move as fast as a horse carrying a person so they could still keep up. The other players might think that's unfair, but they'll quickly change their tune when they find out that their horses can beat up low-level monsters like goblins for them. See? There are plenty of ways to solve this little dilemma without the DM having to resort to threatening their player's character's safety.

[@GarkKahn]

For the brother-sister one must tell apart person from character But hell it's as creepy as you could imagine

[@informitas0117]

Only that he proceeded to give compliments on his actual sisters body.

[@elmerthiendoesgames9061]

To your point about the players on horses waiting for the last one to arrive on foot: Wouldn't it make more sense to just keep the horses going slowly? The group should travel at the speed of its slowest member.

[@bl8de3]

what a hidden youtube gem. +1 sub

[@CallMeKes]

I wish I knew how to tell Nipsy, Ziggy, and Lucky apart. In other news, this game tends to remind me a little of Act Raiser.

[@JoanieDoeShadow]

Nipsey has a nip missing from one of his ears. I don't remember how to tell Ziggy & Lucky apart.

[@jamison85]

@@JoanieDoeShadow I think Ziggy has a broader head, at least that's what I use as an indicator

[@GodOfPlague]

Actraiser was an amazing game

[@hammermanceryt3223]

In my group we joking hit on the sister of the dm and one of the players Shes in on the joke, mildly trolling her two brothers But that paladin guy is a whole new level of weird

[@starbird3939]

Story 1 Sounds like the sister is used to be sexually harassed by her brother. Maybe her parents have been like “your poor brother has ISSUES so you have to be nice to him [and do every disgusting thing he says]” That or the parents went “Boys will be boys. I’m sure plenty of other brothers acted like creeps to their sisters.”

[@teirdalin]

Sounds like it.

[@symantares9171]

Very likely. I imagine That Guy isn't used to hearing "no" in general

[@dionysus_adores]

Yeah there's a high chance her bro might've groomed her too. If she's 7yrs younger she was 11 when he was 18.

[@Bladezeromus]

Or. Hear me out... OR instead of victimizing the woman, taking away her agency, let's just call a spade a spade: She didnt say anything because she's a weirdo, too. A lot more likely than those candyland scenarios ya'll concocted.

[@Michaeljack81sk]

Not sure where you get that from. This might well be the sisters fantasy as much as it is the brothers, she's just more circumspect about it

[@DahLekKnight]

Got some Targaryen madness and incest going on there.

[@alphons1456o]

Hearing the sister lover problem player go on a tantrum about what his character would do makes me think of The Good Doctor "It's what MY CHARACTER would DO! It's what he would DO, DR. HAN!"

[@rynowatcher]

2nd to last one: parts about this do not make sense. OP is not admitting to doing anything that could be offensive and the whole group blocks them. Either they are purposefully excluding parts of the story or all the players are insane. The former being more likely; why would all your players leave your game if it were not you? As far as missing out on roleplay only sessions, those are usually the hardest ones on a dm for a player to miss without warning. They might have prepped an adventure about op's missing family member with back story tie ins that relies on them being there. Combat is the only thing you designed to be plug and play in d&d so that part makes sense.

[@RusticRonnie]

It sounds like the DM of the game was a control freak. So it’s probably that people didn’t want to lose the character they built by being in his game

[@rynowatcher]

@@RusticRonnie you cannot "lose a character." You see, role playing games are completely imaginary and dm's do not report to a central game authority where they take your imagination. You can just leave any time and reuse the same character in any game where the dm is game. This might be a confusing concept, but the world is the dm's, so they get to decide on things like distance, travel times, and such, but you get to decide how your character responds to the world. Therefore, if your character refuses to buy a steed and they say it is 2 weeks by foot; do the other 7 players want to wait 2 weeks for the guy who refuses to buy a horse? The party can decide to leave that character behind, which seemed to be what was happening.

[@thehowlinggamer5784]

Love the abridged of the thumb nail. Also fitting considering the original. I was almost puking at the thought of it...

[@robertwildschwein7207]

🐺

[@seto_kaiba_]

What's the anime?

[@foisopracurtir6389]

@@seto_kaiba_ Seems Sword Art Online

[@seto_kaiba_]

@@foisopracurtir6389 Thnx

[@sagekoh3158]

Ahh yes. my kitty endorphin shot after my own baby kitty tortures me awake by scratching my door every 2 hours due to nocturnal kitty schedules. Story 2: something's missing. details of why being totally summed up as "vague" just let's me know there's something OP isn't saying. The fact that its a "AITA" story confirms to me they do things that are "social faaux pahs" and don't feel like sharing.

[@informitas0117]

Let them in.

[@Cornfiglep]

Re; Vindictive DM; Idk when I hear that EVERYONE else at the table blocks the OP that leaves me thinking OP left out details as to what that may have been, and that potentially they're deluding themselves into believing they did no wrong.

[@ThePlayplay64]

I dissagree, ive been in a few friend groups and later in my life knew to run from them when i see them where one person is king or queen. One person says who stays and who goes and if you don't do what they say they are going to flip sh*t and come at you until you fall in line. Even in my 30's I still meet people like this. My old wow guild was like this... Ask me in high school and i would said op did something wrong. ask me know and yeah, i can see someone pissing off the wrong person for something small and getting blocked in time by everyone. Sometimes it is the group.

[@D64nz]

Last story - the easy answer is to say fine, don't have a horse, and watch everyone else ride off ahead of you, always be last, and even miss some encounters because of that choice. Choices should matter and this is a really easy one to have in game consequences. You don't need to force their hand when you can make the player want to take part instead.

[@Dragons4Dummies]

Banjos playing in the background as the wizard sacrifices himself for his RL sister.

[@HectorCotto97]

That last story is a little complicated but ultimately I side with the OP. Most of the party purchased steeds except OP and another, OP's initial reason for not getting one was due to financial concerns and also due to the fact that they knew that ultimately it didn't matter whether or not they got to the quest area quickly enough or not so they didn't see any immediate benefits to spending some of their limited amount of money on something that might not have been an immediate concern. If there existed some number of benefits to buying a steed then clearly the DM didn't make that clear to OP. As for the 2nd time they had an opportunity to buy a steed I imagine their financial situation was different from before and they could have probably afforded it but chose not to out of stubbornness which is a tad uncool on their part. However the DM's decision wasn't any better since instead of having a peaceful talk with OP about the situation and some possible benefits to buying a steed; instead the DM straight up threatened OP into confirming under threat of termination which is a complete d#$k move on their part and I feel like is an abuse of authority. Sure OP wasn't exactly being a team player but they were new to the game and it seems like nobody went out of their way to explain things to the newbie.

[@demonkingt]

Gaslighting is the new "I'm not a problem you are!" Term for lots of people. Gaslighting people by calling them gaslighters lol

[@DisneyChar]

Steed sounds small, but also sound like a money control move, I'd probably murder hobo before leaving the party. Encumbrance can be shuffled to hand wave 2 people on a horse, or a discount rickshaw.

[@vinnykitty1983]

Op is 0% an ahole. If the dm says that arrival time won't fail a quest then there is no reason to buy one unless dm makes the steeds cheap or starts paying the party more. Gold is precious and the life line of a character and threatening to end a character just because they're saving up what little gold they have is truly and wholly the only ahole move here

[@vodostar9134]

Not buying a steed when the rest of the party is going mounted is a little that-guyish, but I wouldn't say A-hole. I agree, the DM should have explained above table without the threat. I would start giving out levels of exhaustion too. At least sometimes.

[@phantomflower6749]

Sooo that brother flirting with the sister deal was never fully acknowledged??? Did she ever feel weirded out? Was she aware? If so was she totally ok with it??

[@sabin97]

since the story didnt specify i'm assuming she was into it, and everyone else was grossed out. if she wasnt into it, they would have mentioned it.....who knows how act in private......maybe some real life game of thrones...without the gore.

[@phantomflower6749]

@@sabin97 🤢🤢🤢🤢🤮

[@qedproqwo1634]

In a later part of the story (covered by this channel later) the brother gets drunk and shows the party his dick irl because she teased him about not being big enough for her. They want to kick him out and she begs the party to give him another chance and let him keep playing... My guess is she's into it.

[@phantomflower6749]

@@qedproqwo1634 barf 🤢🤮

[@brandonpeterson3434]

Plenty of ways the party and dm could have gone about the player not buying a steed.

[@phatcavy98]

The horse situation I think you missed the point. He was being forced to spend his limited gold on a horse. As a DM I think if it's something you require the players to have, you give it to them. How hard would it be to give them a simple quest from a championship horse ranch where they are given some young horses that failed to meet the ranches standards as a reward in place of money. Or a noble that had allot of his knights die Ina battle that the players helped them with, so he gives them some of his dead knights horses as a reward.

[@BurroughsProductions]

Except the dm clearly wanted him to do it and everyone else was and he was actively slowing down the party no one missed the point op was being stubborn for no reason. Why should op give him something when he was being a problem player

[@phatcavy98]

@@BurroughsProductions sorry, but giving a player a choice and then punishing that player for choosing something different from the other players is a dick move. Again, if a horse is a requirement for a DM, you give it to your players. You don't offer them a chance to use in game resources to buy an "optional" thing, and then punish them for exercising their options. This was a poor execution by a DM that likely railroads in other places. I have a campaign where the players needed to have training in Arcana and knowledge of a forgotten language called Arcanic. I gave them both at character creation so they didn't have to use up their limited character options on something that I need them to have for the campaign.

[@BurroughsProductions]

@phatcavy98 and being stubborn and slowing down ur party cause u don't want to do something is a dick move and u don't get rewarded for that. Demanding the dm give free shit is pretty peak problem player stuff tho lol

[@phatcavy98]

@@BurroughsProductions So I take it you dont support player agency? When you DM do you inform your players what decisions to make in advance so they don't accidently choose the wrong one? If making this decision is a bad choice that slows down the party why not let the players have in game discussions with him about why he needs a horse, you know..... Roleplay? When you make a character, does your DM make you start with zero equipment and have to buy it in game? No, you start with what you need to play the game, so how is this horse any different? This wasn't the players all got together and decided to buy horses, this is the players where subtly told by the DM they NEED to buy horses. He was given a choice and didn't choose correctly which makes me wonder why it wasn't mandatory to begin with? Why didn't the DM jsut say "I want you guys to travel faster so I want to you buy some horses in the next town" why did he present is as a random encounter? Also he is not slowing the party down, he can ride with another player if it's that important. Or the players could have bought a wagon and a couple horses and the whole party could travel in comfort together. Also if you do a quest for someone and they pay you with a horse that is not expecting to be given free stuff, it's earning a reward.

[@BurroughsProductions]

@phatcavy98 I don't support one player causing issues for the others but if u wanna defend it go for it. He was slowing down the party tho. And ud literally be rewarding a problem player. Yall mad the dm made the work for it and are defending a person literally causing issues for the whole party it's wild lol

[@dirt3251]

OP is not the Ahole in my opinion in the last story with the steed. I can understand not wanting to buy a steeds, mayby he's just saving up for better armor or some magic weaponry. I mean if the entire party has a horse, then why can't he travel on the back of one of those? Should be possible for a horse to carry 2 creatures (outside of combat). But it's either spend money or die, OP just wanted to save up his gold for later use and is now forced to spend it on something he doesn't want.

[@D64nz]

Murder is illegal in almost all games so far as i know. So no lawful character can randomly murder people so far as I'm concerned.

[@iitim2152]

Romance in games... Is just gross. Someone is always uncomfortable even when the two parties are both ok with it.

[@GarkKahn]

16:09 I can understand the stupid reasons for the dm, but the others?! Man, and they called themselves friends?

[@gethriel]

It's a FANTASY game. Guy doesn't want a horse; handwave it. Good grief. I don't want one either: it's a money pit and you could lose it NEXT SESSION. What do you do with it when you get to the dungeon?! Tie it up? It gets eaten. Leave it untied? It runs off. Gone too long? It starves. DM handwaves THAT? WHY NOT HANDWAVE the absence of a horse?!

[@Morningstack]

Story made me angry, Blasphemous skill made me angrier xD

[@negljbreakergaming]

as for the first story, tell him he's not welcome, if the sister continues to defend him, even though she isn't the problem player, she's not welcome either if she refuses to play without her brother

[@l0stndamned]

Last story: I agree that one player seems to be making extra work for the DM and being stubborn about it. DM was a tad overreactive and should have explained stuff properly rather than going for threats, but OP was still being a problem. First story is just plain weird. I suspect brother was been scum for so long that sister is desensitised to it.

[@rynowatcher]

I took the last one as less of a threat and more of a "quit being an a-hole and just go along with the rest of the group so I do not have to run two games."

[@deluxxyfan7tristanwood961]

ngl i hope the dm from the vindictive dm story stubs their toe and drops something important to them, maybe gets sick the same day too

[@JimAbooGames]

That first story: Dude needs help big time. Like I fear for this guy's sister if he actually tires something. And I really hope she's ok too. That second story: it wasn't the DM that just sucked here, it was the other players too. None of them were friends at all if they decided to act like that with OP here, even after playing in his game as well. And it sucks cause they took advantage of some one with autism like that. Doge is right, so many people use words like "Gaslight" and a lot of times don't know what it means or downplay its meaning making the word meaningless. Hopefully that op can find new players and a new game that will work with and treat him better than these clowns. The last story: Not the Ahole here the DM is. DM is screwed up in the head here and Op should go find another game somewhere else. If you don't want to buy a horse or mount of any kind that's up to you. Threatening to kill your character off because you won't do what everyone else is doing is really out of line there. If he really wanted players to have a mount of some kind he should have made that more clear instead of saying it was ok if they did or not by making the quests non time sensitive. Not doing what everyone else is doing does not make you an ahole.

[@benwagner5089]

Gaslighting people on the definition of gaslighting. About the only issue I see OP may have done is missing that session without giving the DM a heads-up or an apology afterwards, but that was from him sleeping in unintentionally, and the DM had already killed off his character. Definitely not the a-hole.

[@rynowatcher]

Last one: not buying a steed is like everyone else buying passage on a boat and one player holding out: it splits the party and forces the dm to give you something the others had to pay for. Jerk move. "Will end your character" might just mean the rest of the party will outpace and leave the character behind. "Your character will not enter into Barovia, so roll up one that will," is the counter to, "that is what my character would do." The reasons for not getting a horse seem 100% meta game too.

[@thefanofeverything5039]

I hadn't thought of that but you are right. The character not buying a horse does seem like meta gaming at that point since if everyone else is getting to a town days ahead of time and you're just walking, you'd think the character would at some point have a legit reason to buy the horse even if the player knows it won't affect things.

[@DisneyChar]

Share a horse, wagon, rickshaw, so many options besides give the npc all your gold or I kill your character

[@Captaincory1]

​@@thefanofeverything5039 you don't have to arrive days after the party if you simply pair up with another party member to ride with themz also ship passage is just ship passage you pay, you ride, you leave, buying a horse however, to have to make sure you keep it fed and healthy as well as renting a stable for it to sleep in when you're in town. Plus if your playing a campaign where seafaring is gonna be a major facet, than you're bound to have a player choose the Sailor background which has a feature that lets you secure free passage for the party in exchange for helping the crew with chores on the ship

[@thefanofeverything5039]

@@Captaincory1 you’re making a lot of sense and thank you for disagreeing or stating an opposite take on this without being an absolute jerk about it lol. That being said I guess this stuff just depends on the party, the Dm, and the op. The op can just ride with one of the party members, but I guess they also have a right to be salty if they spend hundreds of gold to get horses and then the op just asks to ride with one of them. I had a friend say that the most important thing in dnd is communication. The Dm making the “I’ll kill your character” statement even if it’s a joke made the op uncomfortable so that was wrong. Op should ask the party how they feel and if the party has any problems they should voice them. This can easily be fixed with retconning or voicing concerns. Letting the Dm change or add what needs to be added or changed.

[@RusticRonnie]

But you could just ride on someone else’s horse

[@marybdrake1472]

Story 1 Well, that is severely inappropriate. It's also slightly funny that he becoming more and more irrelevant.

[@nickeel8401]

Creepy. Kinda sus how the sister was cool with it

[@RusticRonnie]

Its what her character would do

[@TheMightyBattleSquid]

Completely disagree on the last story, doge. Main reason? DM was said to be making them pay a LOT of gold for what was ultimately worthless fluff (as op mentioned, there would never be time limits on stuff). OP is free to spend their in-game currency as they want. The dm could've done a myriad of things better but one OBVIOUS solution is just giving OP a reason to WANT one themselves. Say yes there isn't a time-specific quest but say there's an upcoming race arc. It uses horses and you can RENT one for much cheaper or find someone to borrow theirs. Now, do stuff during the lead up and the actual event to warm op up to this horse and, more generally, having a mount/pet in general. In the end, it'd still be up to OP whether they want to give it a go or not after the arc, but at least everyone gets their moment of riding together and you've made your case. Railroading to the extent this DM did is pure asshole behavior, plain and simple.

[@TheDeadGunslinger]

*Reads video title. *Alabama intensifies.

[@JustAPasserby-e6z]

While the OP In the "Need for Steed" story definitely is a bit pig-headed for not considering AT ALL the complications it poses for the DM if the the party is constantly split between members travelling at different paces and being in different locations experiencing different events where playing catch up eventually become unfeasible as a result essentially turning it into two concurrent campaigns why did it not occur to anyone to A: Eliminate the cost argument by finding and taming animals if anyone had skills to do so or B: Much more practically cut down the costs by only getting as many horses as is needed to pull a wagon which could additionally transport cargo or any party member or potential NPC too injured to ride? Or C: Arranging an encounter where the party is rewarded horses or other forms of transportation as a quest reward or has an opportunity to just steal some from bandits? If the argument against that last one is leaving a financial imbalance with the rest of the party having invested in this necessary expense just balance it out by making sure loot drops for significant magic items leaves Scrooge out in the cold just quietly taunting them as their party gets a temporary advantage over them. No it's just... do it or die. Not even explaining the logistical problem, straight to issuing a very hostile ultimatum.

[@AzureKyle]

I disagree with the ruling on the last story. The DM should never force players to spend their hard earned gold on something they may not want to buy. OP may have been saving up his gold to buy something for his character, like a weapon or some armor. Instead, if the DM wanted them to all have horses, he should have just given them a quest where they all got horses as a reward. On my own experience, one of my DM's just gave us all mounts of our choice at the start of the campaign, as there would be a lot of travelling between towns with some time sensitive quests as well.

[@jamoecw]

Rules Lawyering is sticking to rules and arguing about rules that people forgot about or ignored for fun. so if the world doesn't have Drow being inherently evil like DnD 2.0 and earlier then he isn't rule lawyering as it isn't a rule of the game.

[@Jerepasaurus]

Last story: OP is NOT the A-hole. New player. DM didn't explain anything worth a shit. There's countless ways that could have gone, easily solved, including getting a wagon or sharing a mount with another player. Something folks forget is that taking care of another creature might just feel overwhelming or frustrating to have to not just be forced to spend your gold on, not just to purchase, but keep fed, and then keep safe, and then have to figure what to even do with it when they come across an expanse of terrain or location where this animal can't even reach. DM could have just given them a floating disc item to ride and get pulled along by another steed. Give the players some options, like damn. BE MORE CREATIVE, DM. ffs

[@RandomTrinidadian]

Story 1: and this is who you never play D&D with siblings from Alabama

[@reesescup69]

I have almost 0 doubt the vindictive dm story is missing a lot of detail

[@Spartacus547]

those two cats were brother and sister

[@inglessin]

Story number one Dungeons & Dragons Alabama edition

[@ChuckPalomo]

1:37 it was dark alright

[@androzani]

OP lost all claims to being an asshole when he was threatened. There’s no excuse for that. He should have explain to him that not having a mound while everyone else does will have consequences. If even stating that is meta gaming, well so is threatening someone outside the game. OP had reasons to conserve there spending and is it really meta gaming to conserve your currency? That’s an insane take. If gold is scarce in game, why is it hard to believe OPs character would spend less?

[@nekomancer47]

Nah, gotta disagree with you on that last story, Doge. If the DM wanted to make it mandatory for the players to buy something in order to keep moving the game forward, they gotta make it clear up front and out of character. The players’ in game money is theirs to do with as they please. Sure, refusing to buy things may make things harder or have consequences for them, but if a DM wants to railroad them into a buying a specific thing, they shouldn’t present it as an “option”. Just say “if you don’t buy this thing, you won’t be able to keep traveling with the party since you’ll be left behind.” Not really how I would personally wanna play, but knowing that straight up is better than the DM silently seething cuz they keep putting stables in front of you and getting mad cuz you would rather spend your cash at the potion shop. It’s especially dumb when there’s an easy solution to this that the DM could’ve just gone with; just having the player ride on someone else’s horse with them, like you said. Idk, maybe the DM/other players didn’t wanna do that since everyone else had to pay for a horse and the one player would then get to benefit from their purchases without having to spend his own money, but threatening to get rid of his character is no way to solve such a mundane issue.

[@TheFuriousScribbles]

The steed story seemed a little weird since the OP wasn't clear why their character didn't want one. If there was a good reason like they were playing Pathfinder and OP was a goblin, (goblins hate horses, dogs and anything horse-like or dog-like,) if their character didn't have a lot of money to throw around, or they had previously played in games where the DM targeted the players' mounts and animal companions... Point is, there could have been a reason, but none was given.

[@BlueTressym]

OP specifically said they didn't have much money AND that the GM said they wouldn't fail a quest by being late, so OP didn't see the point in spending money on something that, from his PoV, was completely unnecessary.

[@TheFuriousScribbles]

@@BlueTressym They did? I must have missed that. That's what I get for trying to read while playing videos in the background. I did catch the bit where the OP said that the DM wouldn't fail a quest on account of time, I just missed the bit about not having much money.

[@sebastianoyarcepezoa8920]

Came for the horror stories, stay for the blasphemous gameplay

[@ronwisegamgee]

If standing up to an authoritarian like in the Need For Steed story makes them an a-hole, then better to be an a-hole and maintain self-respect than to capitulate and set a precedent for further authoritarian behavior.

[@hellopeoplee4146]

fire blasphemous gameplay

[@Lazy_eye_blobFish]

I'm not a dnd player, always wanted to be a player but not now with the downward spiral WOTC has it in. Videos like this make me happy and I love hearing the stories even if I know nothing about them. I'm a new sub of doge. 😊

[@dude8351]

You can always try older editions or Pathfinder with no remors :)

[@littlegiantj8761]

These aren't the norm, most tables are decent. And these stories can all be avoided with strict gatekeeping.

[@garuelx8627]

5e is fun despite WOTC's poor decisions. You can always homebrew any of the parts you don't like.

[@littlegiantj8761]

@@garuelx8627 [pathfinder stans have entered the chat]

[@garuelx8627]

@@littlegiantj8761 I've enjoyed 1e, maybe I'll try 2e

[@aidenhughes2472]

Sorry did the dog say sister

[@GarkKahn]

Bruh in the last part the horses were pony or what? You can have 2 in the same horse! I think the dm was an a-hole while op was stupid or at least ignorant

[@adorianpious6957]

That's some bs on the last story. You shouldn't force someone to spend gold they may not have. Resource management is a character thing that puts worth to the gold. If it was such a big deal, dm could give a magic item to increase his speed only during travel so he could keep up, given him a mount for free, or just let him ride with another character/ in a cart. Wagons also exists so that would have been cheaper that the extra mounts.

[@wtichery]

No I understand something about the "vindictive DM" game........ they said "farmboy" too many times, the backstory was all about SA from a god from a cult but OP said that "my farmboy hasn't encountered majicks!" a god in a cult is not majick? and they also hosted their own campaign, i think they were making a very realistic SA story and people did not enjoy it... they also threw in the "im autistic" .... yeah ok i do not believe them...

[@nicholasraw9901]

Ten bucks says number one is in Alabama

[@BlackRainRising]

honestly, don't kink shame, lol. If bro and sis wanna do things, let them, don't hate... there's certainly worse things out there to be into

[@thefanofeverything5039]

I guess I can see how the OP would be in the wrong in the last story, but calling them a jerk seems too harsh given the circumstances. Yeah the DM said it wouldn't be essential to own steeds but then everyone but the OP bought them and now the dm is in this tough spot where its hard to have the entire party get to a town days ahead of one character then wait for them to get there on foot every time; but if the dm just gives OP a steed or some form of mount then that would be unfair to everyone that spent their gold to get that stuff. Its not really DM or Op's fault that they are in this situation though, and I saw some people mentioning how OP could just ride on someone else's horse or something. That is a good solution that I think can work, but it depends on the party. At the same time I can see the other players having a right to feel salty that they spent a lot of gold on horses and then OP the one holdout decides to just use the party's horses instead of getting their own.

[@snonyabeeswax]

forcing a steed on someone is stupid

[@BurroughsProductions]

And forcing ur party to be slow for one person is more stupid

[@RiveroftheWither]

​@@BurroughsProductionsThen either give everyone horses rather than forcing everyone spend all their money on a horse or allow the horseless player ride with another person. Its not right to make someone spend all their money against their will for the parties progression.

[@BurroughsProductions]

@@RiveroftheWither you don't reward problem players. Saying the dm should give out free stuff cause u don't wanna spend money makes u a bad player Also so it's right to let one player slow down the whole party? Lol ok

[@RiveroftheWither]

@@BurroughsProductions He wasn't being a problem player for not giving away all his money to take the DM's railroad. If you want all your players to have transportation, you give them transportation, it's that simple. Also you clearly didn't read anything I typed because neither of my solutions were anything you described. It just sounds like you're the awful dm from the story trying to make a bs excuse to justify wanting to force all your players to get rid of their money because you realized you gave them too much and wanted to retcon it. Get over yourself.

[@shadenox8164]

@@BurroughsProductions You have no idea what he was planning to do with that gold, he could have been saving for better armor for example which is way more important. There's any number of things more useful to spend your gold on than a steed and trying to railroad him into spending it is bad DMing. Insisting because you chose to spend money on something expensive another player is obligated to as well makes YOU the problem player.

[@slagarcrue85]

I love your kitties doggie.

[@williek08472]

Cuddle voids 😻

[@mikaneko]

Strong disagree on the last story, OP was DEFINITELY *not* the A-hole, all he had to do was double up with someone else. The DM was, however.

[@schwarzerritter5724]

Your reaction to the "Vindictive DM" story is strange. Usually you side with the DM in this situation.

[@black69071]

I want to hear the other players side of the story. Sometimes two sides to understand what happened. Edit: to be specific is the guy kicked out by dm.

[@chrisgionti2766]

The problem in the last story is really easy to solve. Just buy a wagon so everyone can travel together. That's what the dm should have offered as well as the individual horses.

[@willlauzon3744]

I don't really blame the dude for hitting on his sister. Incest you see is relative. I'll see myself out....

[@dogwalker3603]

Okay, someone tell me what the hell is his accent

[@galdrnixthral6140]

With the last story, I think the DM was trying to explain to him that if he doesn’t have a horse, then whenever the rest of the party is way up ahead of him if there’s an ambush, they would wait for the guy by himself and kill him, and instead of reading between the lines with that, he just hear if you don’t get a mount, your character is going to die.

[@Xylarxcode]

I mean, is the steed guy really the asshole, though? He was given a choice, he made one and DM didn't like that choice, so he threatened to 'end his character' unless he chose otherwise, leaving me with the question: 'Why did you even give him the choice if you weren't prepared for his answer?' As a DM, if you give your players an option and they don't take it, you should be prepared for that eventuality. If some of your group takes it and some don't, you should be prepared for that as well. If you can't think of a way to harmonize everyone's choices into your campaign, then don't include in the campaign until you figure out a solution to that. Now, obviously, if your party keeps ignoring/declining important plot hooks, then that can become a problem. But we're talking about an optional extra here. If DM isn't prepared for people to say: 'Thanks for the offer, but I'll pass on this opportunity', then he's a bad DM. If you give people a choice, be prepared for both scenarios. So, no, OP is not the asshole. DM is. Simply because his recourse was basically to blackmail a player into making the choice he wanted them to make.

[@BurroughsProductions]

Yes he's is. He was being stubborn for no reason and forcing the others to move at his pace. He's the bad guy. U don't reward problem players

[@al137]

Yes thank you. I was a little thrown off by Doge's take. If the DM is imposing something out of the blue, they should be willing to compromise a little.

[@BurroughsProductions]

@Pwnzworth lol why should the dm compromise when the player won't tho? Especially when they're the problem player

[@Xylarxcode]

@@BurroughsProductions The DM offered them the choice of buying a steed. Choice implies that your direct decision matters and that the DM is prepared for both eventualities. One where you accept the choice and one where you don't. Most players chose to accept, one of them didn't. That's his right. If he's presented with a choice, he should have the right to make his own decision. He did so and the DM couldn't figure out how to implement that into his campaig. Which means he was poorly prepared and didn't actually offer them a choice. He offered them the illusion of one. He wanted them to pick a steed and didn't anticipate a player saying no. One of the core truths of DMing: 'Players will always do something you don't expect.' If the choice isn't real, then he might as well have just given them one steed each and taken it out of their hands. Need to travel fast? Well, hey, we all got a free steed. No problem. But that's not what he did. He allowed the players to choose and when one of them made a choice he didn't like, he resorted to blackmail to force him into it. If you need to resort to blackmailing because your players did something you don't like, you're a shitty DM.

[@BurroughsProductions]

@Xylarxcode and op decided to be difficult and slow everyone down cause they were stubborn. But hey defend the problem player cause u want free stuff. Do u know how much multiple steeds cost? Lol but yea the dm should just give them free stuff right lmao also I doubt he threatened him were supposed to believe the problem player causing issues for the party?

[@Michaeljack81sk]

There is definitely something weird about the sister being totally ok with this. She invited him to the game too so I really have to wonder if she is into it at some level

[@MrGrimjaw]

Same that's sick and weird

[@miscprojects9662]

Anyone heard from sir Knox lately?

[@stephengoddard5362]

Bro was straight giga Chad. That was his side piece not his sister straight gangster knew what his character would do and role-played the shit out of that.