Things I May No Longer Do While Playing II: Stop Making The DM Cry

[The Reverend]

1631: I may not play a necromancer/artificer, save up and preseve all the dragons and other creatures we kill and construct Mecha Ghidorah. Each head with a different breath weapon and kraken tentacles for grasping ending in illithid head bundles.
1631B: if I do manage this abomination then a Flight of dragons ( defined as a horde of hordes) and bahamut and tiamat will show up. All working to zot me and hang pieces of me in every magic school, even the bardic school, especially the bardic school.

[big teej]

1631: I may not play a necromancer/artificer, save up and preseve all the dragons and other creatures we kill and construct Mecha Ghidorah. Each head with a different breath weapon and kraken tentacles for grasping ending in illithid head bundles.
1631B: if I do manage this abomination then a Flight of dragons ( defined as a horde of hordes) and bahamut and tiamat will show up. All working to zot me and hang pieces of me in every magic school, even the bardic school, especially the bardic school.

well now.....

I'll have to add this to the list of terrible terrible things I need to make my players fight.

somewhere after "flying vampire frogs" I think.

[turkishproverb]

Vampire Potatoes are better.


On that note

1632: Never use monsters from Darkwing Duck in a world of darkness game.

[The Reverend]

Also add keen clawed sonic monkeys who explode when you kill them, they should have to fight them

I was actually allowed to create those oddly enough and they were terrifically effective. Very fast, grappled, area effect stun that overlapped, and blew up. Sure the fighter or monk can kill one in a round or three but can the wizard standing next to them survive that blast and the following blast of the now dead monkey that had grappled them. The death blast was very powerful, but small radius just three squares.

[Metahuman1]

1633: Under no circumstances my the NPC Vampire cast Glitter Dust on himself and command the entire teenage female population of the city to attack the PC's.

1634: And if 1633 is broken, The teenage population will NOT actually listen!

[Randomguy]

1635a: I will not add the 100 challenges for scoundrels, listed in the back of complete scoundrel, to my bucket list. Especially not the parts that involve convincing a barbarian that she's a powerful sorceress, tricking the wizard into thinking his magic is broken, putting a monk at the throne of a barbarian clan and breaking into the home of a powerful noble, just because I can.

1635b. If 1635 a is broken, I can't try doing it all with the same character.

1635c. No attempting to derail a campaign and make it about my character, trying to complete the list.

[HalfDragonCube]

1636. If my character can do with a fishing rod what a supercharger barbarian can do with a greataxe, I am not allowed to play that character.
1637. My primary method of attack is not allowed to be travelling back in time and killing the enemies as children.
1637a. The subsequent paradox may not be my primary method of attack either.

[Randomguy]

1637b: Except when playing Continuum, in which case I may not specialise in the above things because it would make make my character severely underpowered.

[wiimanclassic]

1638-May not be an Art of War varient fighter in all fighter party.




To anyone wondering what I'm talking about.

Spoiler

Show

They hate me out damaging them at level 1 when ever I hit half health. The DM also hates that that also signifies the encounter is now going to die horribly.

My god it was funny the first time, half health, and weapon specialization meant a +2 tier boost so I did 2d6+3*strength in damage if I hit someone. ECL be damned I can 2 shot all equal level enemies, and in PVP people will just DIE.

[Exelbirth]

1625:
I am also forbidden from statting up Alucard or Sebastion and using them in game.

1625a:
Doubly so if I start using another PC as their masters.

Ok, those names are tugging at a part of my brain, but getting nothing. What are these guys from?

[Ksheep]

Ok, those names are tugging at a part of my brain, but getting nothing. What are these guys from?

Try spelling Alucard backwards. As for Sebastion… closest thing I can find (that makes sense with the rest of the statement) is Don Sebastian de Villanueva, from the Don Sebastian chronicles.

[Exelbirth]

Try spelling Alucard backwards. As for Sebastion… closest thing I can find (that makes sense with the rest of the statement) is Don Sebastian de Villanueva, from the Don Sebastian chronicles.

That's why Alucard sounds so familiar, lol. I think there's been a few characters by that name. And the only thing I thought of for sebastian was the crab from little mermaid (I suppose that'd work for a bard, lol)

Speaking of, a guy I played dnd with once randomly broke into disney songs throughout the session.

1639: Disney is not allowed at the table.
1639b: Or wizards named Yen Sid.

[Burnheart]

Ok, those names are tugging at a part of my brain, but getting nothing. What are these guys from?

I think the anime's Hellsing and Black Butler.

[The Boz]

1640. May not play either a Cleric, Paladin or Inquisitor by the name of Alexander Anderson
1641. May not play a Cleric/Rogue, devotee of a vengeful god, and be named Dexter Morgan
1642. None of my characters sound like Morgan Freeman

[Unseenmal]

Vampire:
1643: I may no longer play any Malkavian with the Fantasy Derangement (Living in a book). While funny, it may be bad form to narrate EVERYTHING your character does. "Looking at the Prince he wondered, 'Can I kill him and take his place? More importantly, does the Prince taste like royalty?'" OR "Without notice, he snuck into the Tremere Chantry" (this one was in the vicinity of about 6 Tremere that had actually not noticed him until he spoke)
1644: I may no longer play a Malkavian that takes Multiple Personality Disorder and roleplay it to such perfection that other players complain that I get to play so many characters. (GM randomly rolled a d10 and the # corresponded to a personality, all on different char sheets with separate stats, specialties and appearance)
1645: I may no longer play a Malkavian that goes Catatonic at the sight of blood.
1646: Simply...no playing Malkavians ever again.

D&D:
1647: I may never play a rogue that takes only thieves tools, armor, alchemists fire, tindertwigs, thunderstones, tanglefoot bags and sunrods as his only equipment and expect the GM/DM to allow me to live past character creation (but what a great char that was)

[Exelbirth]

Vampire:
1644: I may no longer play a Malkavian that takes Multiple Personality Disorder and roleplay it to such perfection that other players complain that I get to play so many characters. (GM randomly rolled a d10 and the # corresponded to a personality, all on different char sheets with separate stats, specialties and appearance)

Personally I'd rule that the personalities have different mental stats, since the body doesn't change. (unless it does)

D&D:
1647: I may never play a rogue that takes only thieves tools, armor, alchemists fire, tindertwigs, thunderstones, tanglefoot bags and sunrods as his only equipment and expect the GM/DM to allow me to live past character creation (but what a great char that was)

This makes me curious, is it based off a character from something, or did you plan out a perfect way to use those items.

[Unseenmal]

Personally I'd rule that the personalities have different mental stats, since the body doesn't change. (unless it does)

Yes the Social/Mental stats changed, merits/flaws, knowledges, etc.... Anything physical stayed the same. It was alot of fun to roleplay so many different "chars". Especially when the personalities knew nothing of each other and conversations they had with otehr PCs were not carried over....

This makes me curious, is it based off a character from something, or did you plan out a perfect way to use those items.

It is based on character I made...he was a lvl1 halfing rogue. I bought those items thinking they would be handy to have for any char...especially a rogue. The DM started me and another PC in a prison cell. So I didn't have my equipment. So I asked the DM if I could have sleight of handed some items and hidden them on my person. He agreed. I rolled, did fairly well and the DM said I was able to pocket 1 lockpick, 2 tindertwigs and 4 thunderstones. Anyway, through amazing use of said items....I was able to Macgyver and escape from the prison. I used the lockpick to free me and the other PC, tindertwigs to start a "fire" to get us out of our cells, then used the thunderstones to great effect to stun the various patrols we came across until we got out of the city. The DM later told me that he never planned to have us escape as that was how me and the other PC met the rest of the party. We were being 'assigned' as punishment to a mission with these other people to make up for our transgressions. But due it being so cool, he went with it.

EDIT: He now knew why the other players warned him about me playing a rogue. I used to be good with them....but I've not played in so long, I am atrophied....Plus, I was banned from ever playing a rogue with ANY of those items again.

[Exelbirth]

It is based on character I made...he was a lvl1 halfing rogue. I bought those items thinking they would be handy to have for any char...especially a rogue. The DM started me and another PC in a prison cell. So I didn't have my equipment. So I asked the DM if I could have sleight of handed some items and hidden them on my person. He agreed. I rolled, did fairly well and the DM said I was able to pocket 1 lockpick, 2 tindertwigs and 4 thunderstones. Anyway, through amazing use of said items....I was able to Macgyver and escape from the prison. I used the lockpick to free me and the other PC, tindertwigs to start a "fire" to get us out of our cells, then used the thunderstones to great effect to stun the various patrols we came across until we got out of the city. The DM later told me that he never planned to have us escape as that was how me and the other PC met the rest of the party. We were being 'assigned' as punishment to a mission with these other people to make up for our transgressions. But due it being so cool, he went with it.

EDIT: He now knew why the other players warned him about me playing a rogue. I used to be good with them....but I've not played in so long, I am atrophied....Plus, I was banned from ever playing a rogue with ANY of those items again.

You are now my hero/idol.

[The Glyphstone]

Heck, a DM willing to throw away his entire plot like that is a keeper regardless of what he bans for you afterwards.

[Unseenmal]

Heck, a DM willing to throw away his entire plot like that is a keeper regardless of what he bans for you afterwards.

Oh I didn't fault him for it...I was mostly banned because I always played the rogue..but to great effect, this scenario just showcased that to him. He wanted me to branch out to play other things. It wasn't my fault, really, no one else wanted to ever play the rogue and I lived further away so everyone else chose classes before I got there. So in each campaign that followed this one, I chose a completely different class each game. He allowed me to choose first. Good guy, too bad he moved away.

[Sgt. Cookie]

1648: "Mike Tyson" Is not an acceptable character concept.
1648a: Doubly so if it is a point buy game. And I put every point into strength.

[The Boz]

1648: "Mike Tyson" Is not an acceptable character concept.
1648a: Doubly so if it is a point buy game. And I put every point into strength.

1648b. And that character may not have a bite attack. No, not even while raging.

[boomwolf]

1649: I may not recreate anime characters as my DnD character, no matter how well-balanced they are compared to the party.

[noparlpf]

1649: I may not recreate anime characters as my DnD character, no matter how well-balanced they are compared to the party.

1650: I may not play a "Magical Girl", no matter how much I want to.

[Deepbluediver]

1651: I should not make suggestions for homebrewed rule-changes to the DM in the middle of combat.
1651a: My entire turn cannot consist of the most confusing and onerous mechanics in the core rule books to prove my point.
1651b: Any home-brewed suggestions presented to the DM for consideration must be less than 3 pages in length per session.

[The Boz]

1651a: My entire turn cannot consist of the most confusing and onerous mechanics in the core rule books to prove my point.

Last time I played a Monk, I was explicitly forbidden from grappling.

[Kazyan]

1652: I cannot play a max-charisma artificer based on Cave Johnson.

[Doorhandle]

1653: I cannot, will not, and SHALL NOT play are Doc scratch, Lord English, or Jack Noir.
1653.B: No, not even in Noblis.
1653:.C I don't care if they are totally green sun princes, I still can't play them in exalted!
1654.D In the same vein, the party wizard cannot be Sarda, before OR after apotheosis.

[InsiderTrading]

1655: The Dirty Harry "Feeling lucky" Speech cannot be used in conjunction with a crossbow.
1655a: Even if it is a repeating crossbow
1655b: Even if it is a Large crossbow pried from the cold dead hands of a Giant.
1655c: Using it in conjunction with a Wand of lightning bolt is right out.

1656: I may not Strap a Wand of magic missile and a Wand of fireball together and call it a "Pulse Rifle".
1656a: Even if the game is otherwise a direct ripoff of the plot of Aliens.

[boomwolf]

1656: if my combat action takes more then 3 pages to explain, it is Illegal.