Things I May No Longer Do While Playing 14: The DM is not my therapist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hellpyre

That reminds me of a fun one

*May not use wind wall and an explosive potion to form an impromptu breaching charge
**May definitely not them proceed to sweep rooms with fireball while we advance room-by-room
***The paladin should most definitely not be advocating to kill them all and let the gods sort them out.

---

I think you've got that bacwards. You are REQUESTED AND REQUIRED to breach and sweep using explosives and fireballs. It's a moral imperative! At least for me; I was running a kender cleric of Sirrion
(Dragonlance god of fire) in I9 Day of Al-Akbar. I got ahold of the delayed blast fireball, figured them out, matched them up with my hoopak, and we steamrolled the opposition.

*As the DM, not allowed to weaponize the party's catchphrase of "We were minding our own business!" as an excuse to attack them, when there were, in fact, minding their own business.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rater202

*When the GM proposes an ExvsWoD game about a group of Exalts on a road trip around the country investigating hauntings and monster sitings, the players are not to conspire to each make a different member of Mystery Inc and see how long it takes the GM to notice.
**No matter how much I want to say "Rooby-Roo!" in the voice I affect for my wolf-totem's War Form when they realize.
***While Fred could plausibly be represented by a Zenith Caste, Velma by a Twilight, and Daphne by a Chosen of Serenity, Shaggy is not a Dawn Cast.
****No number of clips from Phantosaur will convince the GM otherwise.

---

***** No, I can't take Ultra-Instinct Shaggy, either. Because then you'd have two Chosen of Serenity, unless I'm color-blind (...which I am, a little) and the blue aura is actually violet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hellpyre

***The paladin should most definitely not be advocating to kill them all and let the gods sort them out.

---

Why not? You said that like it was a bad thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KorvinStarmast

Why not? You said that like it was a bad thing.

---

Might be problematic if they were playing an Oath of Redemption pally... or if they were doing it in such numbers as to significantly increase the gods' workload... (wouldn't surprise me, on this board)

* Triple-teaming the BBEG in combat is sound tactics, and allowed, maybe even encouraged.

** Triple-teaming physics in such a way that the BBEG ends up as collateral damage, however, will make the DM sad.


* Not allowed to point out to the DM that he has specifically asked me to build a Gnomish artificer, despite knowing darn well what my sense of humour tends to be like. Particularly a Gnomish artificer from a country whose national character is loosely based on my own RL personality.

** Not allowed to attempt to introduce Emwelchus, Gnomish god of Heavy Artillery, into the campaign world
(although I'm going to try anyways... or maybe just Emwelchus, Gnomish god of Explosions)

*** There is no Gnomish religious order called 'The Little Sisters of Perpetual Combustion', and it is wrong of me to try and create it.

**** I'll probably get away with horrifically abusing wands of low-level spells crafted into 'experimental Gnomish warheads' for a while, but I'm probably not allowed to see just how stupid I can get with it. I suspect the 8 single-shot wands of Fireball slaved to the same command word, bundled with a magic mouth on the bolt itself to speak the command word on impact, in order to make an AIM-9 Sidewinder Ballista Bolt will be the limit, but we'll see (don't really know if that's 100% RAW legal, but I'm pretty sure my DM will let me get away with it, at least once)

***** The Gnomish equivalent of Halloween isn't a psychotic illusion-fest that is so traumatizing to non-Gnomes that anyone caught in the country that day has to hide in a lead-lined bunker with permanent trueseeing cast over it. Or maybe it is :smallamused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rater202

*When the GM proposes an ExvsWoD game about a group of Exalts on a road trip around the country investigating hauntings and monster sitings, the players are not to conspire to each make a different member of Mystery Inc and see how long it takes the GM to notice.
**No matter how much I want to say "Rooby-Roo!" in the voice I affect for my wolf-totem's War Form when they realize.
***While Fred could plausibly be represented by a Zenith Caste, Velma by a Twilight, and Daphne by a Chosen of Serenity, Shaggy is not a Dawn Cast.
****No number of clips from Phantosaur will convince the GM otherwise.

---

I am fairly certain shaggy is best represented by a chosen of air who enjoys consuming everything he comes across. Think Ten Winds with more "run away".

That reminds me...

*I may not foil the party's plans with a group of meddling kids.
**Even if that includes a talking dog.
***Especially if that includes a much smaller talking dog.

However, we can foil the DMs plans with a coordinated group of meddling PCs (and have).

My Makavian's derangement cannot be Jerusalem syndrome.

*May not speculate about how familial curses that last for n generations interact with inbred royal lines

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by animorte

That reminds me...

*I may not foil the party's plans with a group of meddling kids.
**Even if that includes a talking dog.
***Especially if that includes a much smaller talking dog.

However, we can foil the DMs plans with a coordinated group of meddling PCs (and have).

---

* May not foil the party’s plans by having them encounter some annoying baby goats, then tell them they would have gotten away with it but for those pesky kids.

* Vestals were not the real life version of the Sisters of Perpetual Combustion.

* My gnomish artificer should not act like Lina Inverse.

** Neither my gnomish artificer or any homunculus may act like Pokota.

* If my kobold artificer builds an airship for the party, it must be sized for medium creatures. Not tiny.

** Yes, even if all the players are kobolds.

* Cannot create the manga version of The Necronomicon.

** Or the colouring book.

*** None of Junji Ito's books are any of the above already.

* Speaking of Junji Ito, I will never drink oil in front of other people at the table regardless if we're playing a game or not.

* No puzzle should require reinstalling Windows 98 to solve.

** Make that any OS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rater202

My Makavian's derangement cannot be Jerusalem syndrome.

---

** Or the belief that they're a character in a game.
*** Particularly a game we're not actually playing.

* My concept for a Nosferatu cannot be 'Fred Jones, except exactly the same'.

"Friendship=Magic" does not appear anywhere in the Life Equation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rater202

"Friendship=Magic" does not appear anywhere in the Life Equation.

---

Isn't that one supposed to be the meaning of life and refuting nihilism and all that? Why shouldn't it have that part then?

* If I'm actually kind of hoping for a fight, I probably shouldn't insist that we try diplomacy first on the only (potential) combat encounter of the night.

** Even if in one of the few sessions I missed, the party nearly destroyed the world by accident by assuming that a character was evil (and promptly killing them) because the monster manual said so, despite this being a homebrew world. And the character not being evil. Or aggressive.

*** Should probably stop bringing up the time the party murdered the good-aligned, friendly lich for no reason. Especially since it was years ago.

**** And should probably stop being annoyed about missing a fight, given that we now have right of passage, a friendly (or at least non-hostile) guide, and warning of a local empire that uses huge swarms of undead as troops.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeChameleon

* If I'm actually kind of hoping for a fight, I probably shouldn't insist that we try diplomacy first on the only (potential) combat encounter of the night.

---

One of my players did this.

It lead to one of the most epic role-playing scenes in my campaign, led to the "We have pamphlets!" inside joke, and still has ongoing ramifications that will shake the campaign world to its core.

*May not refer to laudanum as "steampunk fentanyl"

*I'm not allowed to translate Drgonforce songs into fantasy languages for my Bard songs.
**Especially not The Last Dragonborn into Dovahzhul in an Elderscrolls-themed game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rater202

*I'm not allowed to translate Drgonforce songs into fantasy languages for my Bard songs.
**Especially not The Last Dragonborn into Dovahzhul in an Elderscrolls-themed game.

---

... why on Earth not, unless your singing voice is even worse than mine?

* Playing Valhalla Calling (whatever version) is going to make people nervous, even if it is thematic.
** Yes, it's an awesome song, but people go to Valhalla when they're dead. Are you deliberately trying to invoke a TPK?
*** Fine, but even in the afterlife, trying to out-drink Thor is going to cause a CON check.

*Walter White was not one of the suspects in Clue

* May not set fire to the insane asylum in Charhollow
** May not get into a gunfight against unknown enemies with an ally who had just joined the group and had (1) zero investment in the plan and (2) who'd been arguing with his wife (IC and OC) for about 30 minutes before we staged the raid.

* No longer allowed to employ the "if I roleplay in a really entertaining and comedic way so that all the other players are laughing, they will want my character to stick around and thus not report my treason to Friend Computer" strategy. It's just too damned O.P.

I thought that was half the point of playing Paranoia when you're not getting instantly murderlized by Friend Computer.

I'm not allowed to make a character who kills enemies with copies of Robert's Rules of Order. Whether by hitting them with books or annoying then to death by quoting out of context, irrelevant passages.

In fact, I'm not allowed to reference RRO anymore.

*May not advocate for implementing Friend Computer's policies in real life
**Not every political problem can be solved with tranquilizer pills
***Or at least that's what people keep telling me

* I may not challenge the enemy leader to a porridge eating contest.
** Even if I can cite precedent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anonymouswizard

* I may not challenge the enemy leader to a porridge eating contest.
** Even if I can cite precedent.

---

*** Porridge wrestling is right out.

*"Homer Simpson did it" is not a good justification for doing anything, let alone in a Cthulhu Mythos game.
**Especially not challenging Cthulhu himself to an eating contest.
***I cannot eat Cthulhu

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rater202

*"Homer Simpson did it" is not a good justification for doing anything, let alone in a Cthulhu Mythos game.

---

Objection! He's clearly some kind of eldritch abomination!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by animorte

That reminds me...

*I may not foil the party's plans with a group of meddling kids.
**Even if that includes a talking dog.
***Especially if that includes a much smaller talking dog.

However, we can foil the DMs plans with a coordinated group of meddling PCs (and have).

---

I will not arbitrarily fireball the party with the smaller talking dog.

The PLAYER who introduced the monstrosity, OTOH.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomandtish

I will not arbitrarily fireball the party with the smaller talking dog.

The PLAYER who introduced the monstrosity, OTOH.....

---

I think "I may not attack the other players with fireballs" is a good general rule.

DrewID