RPG dislikes

[SDragon]

Players that quickly have what in the setting would be more money than god. Most players will go along with what hooks the GM will give them, but I like having money still be scarce and therefore important enough to motivate the PCs. In fact, I prefer it to the "imminent danger to you" motivation, just because it's a bit of a stretch to keep the PCs constantly in danger somehow.

I think this can be very DM/GM specific, though. You can always take a bit of inspiration from Cowboy Bebop when handling financial issues; just because they're earning big rewards doesn't mean they aren't accidentally also running up almost equally big collateral expenses. Therefore, big rewards don't mean that the characters aren't struggling, financially.

Combat where PCs and NPCs constantly exchange blows in an uninteresting manner. Hit/miss/damage if hit. Repeat until death.

Yeah, I've run into this in d20, too. I try to spice it up a bit with flavor, but I can't do that consistently under that system. Although, it's much easier with exceptional rolls, whether good or bad, and on either my part or the players. I've had shifters trip over animal companions, falling face first into sewage, I've had kobolds who's last words were "iiitt'sss juuuusstt a fleeesshhwooouuund!!!", and more. In my games, the exceptional rolls are where the fun really shines.

[beejazz]

I think this can be very DM/GM specific, though. You can always take a bit of inspiration from Cowboy Bebop when handling financial issues; just because they're earning big rewards doesn't mean they aren't accidentally also running up almost equally big collateral expenses. Therefore, big rewards don't mean that the characters aren't struggling, financially.

from the shop you trashed, and the medical bill for that policeman, and the... [long list of stuff I can't remember] ...KILLED THE DOUGH." Bell peppers and beef.

Yeah, I've run into this in d20, too. I try to spice it up a bit with flavor, but I can't do that consistently under that system. Although, it's much easier with exceptional rolls, whether good or bad, and on either my part or the players. I've had shifters trip over animal companions, falling face first into sewage, I've had kobolds who's last words were "iiitt'sss juuuusstt a fleeesshhwooouuund!!!", and more. In my games, the exceptional rolls are where the fun really shines.

Oh, the descriptive stuff on the good rolls is definitely cool. We play with a critical hit deck, so crazy stuff happens every now and again.

[Lmns Crn]

On a semi-related note, a (mostly DM-related) peeve:

Combat systems (or more rarely, other mechanics) crammed full of ways for characters to have fools made of them.

One of my first gaming experiences was with a D20-based Star Wars game, with all the players being Jedi. Instead of interpreting a rolled 1 on a D20 as an automatic miss/failure, the GM was treating it as the kind of failure you might find in a slapstick show. Jedi essentially tripping on their own shoelaces, falling on the ground, and cutting themselves on their own blades. People dropping things, bumping into each other, accidentally knocking each other down.

Yeah, it was pretty descriptive combat, but I couldn't help but think: We're supposed to be heroes, with mystical powers and preternatural balance and coordination and awareness to boot. Isn't this Three Stooges bit a little below us?

[LordVreeg]

another DM peeve...
(and a shout out to SG525 for working this)

non-original spell names and functions...
If anyone has been going through LC's magic systems and the different types of magic, they'll see a rich grouping of magic that helps make the setting unique..
(no Ork magic there!)

By contrast, so many settings that are supposedly original are still stuck in the 'sleep, magic missle, fireball--malaise'  At least change the frackin' names to something setting specific...

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

Wow, a lot of hate for a bunch of stuff.  I'm almost afraid to post for fear that people will not like what I say.

I hate my "+Just Enough" bonus against Peer-Induced Fear.

(in no particular order)
1) They Are Inherently Evil: This isn't just dealing with low-level mortals like orcs and misinterpreting their "Usually Evil" listing, this goes all the way up.  Demons, things with a lot of tentacles, undead, whatever.  If they have any sort of description like "evil because they are made of evil" or "possessing an eternal hatred of the living" or even "their entire species is terribly cruel but for maybe a few exceptions" I have an ingrained reaction to loathe it.   :axe:   I couldn't tell you exactly why: Maybe I have a world-view such that this is where I draw the line of "too unrealistic".  Maybe I think it's unfair to the creatures involved: equal rights for all.  *shrug*

[Note: If it's information reporting on how the creature is portrayed in real-world myths it doesn't bother me.  Try wrapping your head around that.]

2) Call of Cthulhu, Midnight, or You Can't Win: If you can't win then why are you trying?  I get that some people like these sorts of games, and I appreciate entertainment scarcity enough that I don't deny anyone who wants that sort of game their play.  I just don't get it.  [Friendly warning: Don't try to explain it, it won't work.]

3) Well, We Have A War Over Here, Meanwhile A Secret Group of X Is Secretly Taking Over So They Can Literally Unleash Hell'¦'¦'¦: It's like #2: if you're world is going to Hell, you can either A) go there first and beat the rush, B) grab a torch and help it along because it's #$&%*-up anyway.  I don't mind a little war or a bit of conspiracy (though they do have to be small, I'll admit), but after I certain point I feel like beating my head over all the complex implications of every single action I could take.  I'm a simple person who needs simple problems, anything more and it's time to set up my folding chair on the sideline and laugh.

4) Wow, Magic Is Now Rare, Gosh It Got A Lot Cooler: I used to hate the idea of low-magic settings, or really any setting where there was some reason people didn't like using magic/having magic around.  However my favorite series is Discworld, so I've become accustomed to the idea that magic may be something people don't want to use and/or is dangerous enough to keep it away from people.  What I still hate is the idea that this kind of setting makes magic cool.  It just doesn't work out for me: it's magic you already don't have it in real life and it's spectacular even when it's subtle.  If it's rare then it's just not showing up much and there doesn't seem to be any point to the move.  "Rare magic" should mean something other than "so now it's cool".

5) Humans Are the Adaptable Ones: The more I come to learn about cultures around the world the less I think humans are all that diverse.  What I'd like to see is some settings where humans aren't the only ones given the "anything goes" approach.

6) The World Works How We Think It Does: This is a little tricky to articulate: There are certain ideas that exist in the real world where humans have taken their own ideas to be truth rather than what the world around them shows.  Mind over Matter.  Good and Evil.  There are also fantasy versions that I hate: e.g. Words have Power.  And there are also some tropes that I don't mind quite as much: death and chaos are bad things, for example.  I really feel these are a form of supreme arrogance on the part of humans and would rather see settings in which they didn't appear or turned out to be controlled by other sentient minds using non-sentient powers.


Well, these have been my peeves.  I hope I haven't ticked anyone off.

[Lmns Crn]

1) They Are Inherently Evil:

5) Humans Are the Adaptable Ones:

These, though, I totally, strongly agree with you about. Especially #5: giving all your cultures a sort of description except for one, and just saying "well, they're adaptable!", seems like a signal that you've run out of ideas. (Whether you're saying it about humans or about anything else.)

[Ra-Tiel]

[...]
4) Wow, Magic Is Now Rare, Gosh It Got A Lot Cooler: I used to hate the idea of low-magic settings [...]

There are usually two types of "low magic" that get easily confused.

Type A: Magic is rare but still somewhat powerful.

Type B: Magic is powerless but relatively common.

The problem with type A is that if you allow a rpg in such a setting, that suddenly 9 out of 10 PCs are those "rare" one in a million wizards.

The problem with type B is that why in the Nine Hells should anyone ever study magic if they can't really influence the game with it?

[LordVreeg]

Wow, a lot of hate for a bunch of stuff.  I'm almost afraid to post for fear that people will not like what I say.

I hate my "+Just Enough" bonus against Peer-Induced Fear.

(in no particular order)
1) They Are Inherently Evil: This isn't just dealing with low-level mortals like orcs and misinterpreting their "Usually Evil" listing, this goes all the way up.  Demons, things with a lot of tentacles, undead, whatever.  If they have any sort of description like "evil because they are made of evil" or "possessing an eternal hatred of the living" or even "their entire species is terribly cruel but for maybe a few exceptions" I have an ingrained reaction to loathe it.   :axe:   I couldn't tell you exactly why: Maybe I have a world-view such that this is where I draw the line of "too unrealistic".  Maybe I think it's unfair to the creatures involved: equal rights for all.  *shrug*

[Note: If it's information reporting on how the creature is portrayed in real-world myths it doesn't bother me.  Try wrapping your head around that.]

2) Call of Cthulhu, Midnight, or You Can't Win: If you can't win then why are you trying?  I get that some people like these sorts of games, and I appreciate entertainment scarcity enough that I don't deny anyone who wants that sort of game their play.  I just don't get it.  [Friendly warning: Don't try to explain it, it won't work.]

3) Well, We Have A War Over Here, Meanwhile A Secret Group of X Is Secretly Taking Over So They Can Literally Unleash Hell'¦'¦'¦: It's like #2: if you're world is going to Hell, you can either A) go there first and beat the rush, B) grab a torch and help it along because it's #$&%*-up anyway.  I don't mind a little war or a bit of conspiracy (though they do have to be small, I'll admit), but after I certain point I feel like beating my head over all the complex implications of every single action I could take.  I'm a simple person who needs simple problems, anything more and it's time to set up my folding chair on the sideline and laugh.

4) Wow, Magic Is Now Rare, Gosh It Got A Lot Cooler: I used to hate the idea of low-magic settings, or really any setting where there was some reason people didn't like using magic/having magic around.  However my favorite series is Discworld, so I've become accustomed to the idea that magic may be something people don't want to use and/or is dangerous enough to keep it away from people.  What I still hate is the idea that this kind of setting makes magic cool.  It just doesn't work out for me: it's magic you already don't have it in real life and it's spectacular even when it's subtle.  If it's rare then it's just not showing up much and there doesn't seem to be any point to the move.  "Rare magic" should mean something other than "so now it's cool".

5) Humans Are the Adaptable Ones: The more I come to learn about cultures around the world the less I think humans are all that diverse.  What I'd like to see is some settings where humans aren't the only ones given the "anything goes" approach.

6) The World Works How We Think It Does: This is a little tricky to articulate: There are certain ideas that exist in the real world where humans have taken their own ideas to be truth rather than what the world around them shows.  Mind over Matter.  Good and Evil.  There are also fantasy versions that I hate: e.g. Words have Power.  And there are also some tropes that I don't mind quite as much: death and chaos are bad things, for example.  I really feel these are a form of supreme arrogance on the part of humans and would rather see settings in which they didn't appear or turned out to be controlled by other sentient minds using non-sentient powers.


Well, these have been my peeves.  I hope I haven't ticked anyone off.

ticked anyone off?  This is not that kind of thread.  I think this has been a great thread for just getting stuff off our chests and finding out what other GM's think about different games.  I think it's great you posted this, there is no right or wrong.  I already goaded one person that shall remain namelsss (SG_2_, not that I said it) into working his magic out.

I totally agree about the inherently evil schtick.  Especially for races that exist side by side in the world.
And in my setting, hobyt's are the adaptable ones...

[Ra-Tiel]

[...] I totally agree about the inherently evil schtick.  Especially for races that exist side by side in the world.

Not necessarily. I'd rather have an "inherently evil" race that actually sticks with that scheme, instead of the drow as they are presented in the FR. On one hand they are incredibly cruel, and nasty, and make their junior priestresses getting knocked up by a glabrezu in a ritual initiation orgy. On the other hand good olde Ed said that ~10% of all drow worship Eilistraee, a chaotic good hedonistic moon goddess. :-/

And in my setting, hobyt's are the adaptable ones...

Imho, having a single race being "adaptable" leads to only one possible consequence: one available race to choose from. Evolution holds true, even - and perhaps even more so - in a fantastic world with magic and dragons and demons and other stuff that can devestate whole regions in a few hours' time.

A race that is unable to adapt to a certain environmental impuls (a change in the sun's light, the appearance of magic, a strange disease, ...) is going to die. Plain and simple. No exceptions but extremely heavy DM handwaving.

[Snargash Moonclaw]

I gotta agree about adaptability and generalization vs specialization in species and evolution. (Bucky Fuller said a lot bout this. . .) One thing that I do look at regarding humans is a great syncretic ingenuity - reflected in language as well as culture and technology, but then on Panisadore they are a genetic syncretism to begin with, even though they've long forgotten this fact. All the races display a great deal of evolutionary adaption, particularly in cultural terms; humans simply have a flare for fusion and synthesis constituting an evolutionary mechanism far less prominent in other races.

I've found it interesting to note how many of the pet peeves people bring up here are actually present in Panisadore. However, I at least like to think that, rather than discarding them, I'm successfully going back and reworking the common tropes and assumptions into distinctly new and different forms and manifestations which eliminate the reasons they annoy.

D&D has always held a lot of simplifications become stereotypes that drive me nuts - especially since there was never any actual reason in the game itself to hold onto many of them. I recall someone who liked to play paladins (in 1st ed.) who absolutely insisted that the class *must* remain strictly celibate *as written* even though he could point to no source for this. ("I've been playing paladins for years, so I know. . .") gah!

[LordVreeg]

James W. Loewen loves you.
[blockquote=S&M]
I gotta agree about adaptability and generalization vs specialization in species and evolution. (Bucky Fuller said a lot bout this. . .) One thing that I do look at regarding humans is a great syncretic ingenuity - reflected in language as well as culture and technology, but then on Panisadore they are a genetic syncretism to begin with, even though they've long forgotten this fact. All the races display a great deal of evolutionary adaption, particularly in cultural terms; humans simply have a flare for fusion and synthesis constituting an evolutionary mechanism far less prominent in other races.[/blockquote]

What do I hate?  When my favorite creative collusion site reduces scope dramtically and every third thread is about any particular thing (or rule system).  I'm here to read the creative work of others, to be contructive in helping them, to see the rules they create around their setting that make them unique, to get feedback on my own posts.  I love the crunch postings lately by Snakefing and SG525 lately.  I love commenting on the Wiki, and teling folks what is shining brightest...
[/bitch]

[SDragon]

I think this can be very DM/GM specific, though. You can always take a bit of inspiration from Cowboy Bebop when handling financial issues; just because they're earning big rewards doesn't mean they aren't accidentally also running up almost equally big collateral expenses. Therefore, big rewards don't mean that the characters aren't struggling, financially.

from the shop you trashed, and the medical bill for that policeman, and the... [long list of stuff I can't remember] ...KILLED THE DOUGH." Bell peppers and beef.

Exactly. If I'm not mistaken, there were similar statements in several episodes, and the logic is implicit throughout the entire show. In fact, I think Mushroom Samba is the only episode where they ended up poor because they didn't get a big reward.

Yeah, I've run into this in d20, too. I try to spice it up a bit with flavor, but I can't do that consistently under that system. Although, it's much easier with exceptional rolls, whether good or bad, and on either my part or the players. I've had shifters trip over animal companions, falling face first into sewage, I've had kobolds who's last words were "iiitt'sss juuuusstt a fleeesshhwooouuund!!!", and more. In my games, the exceptional rolls are where the fun really shines.

For my group, it's not just the critical hits, but the critical fumbles, too. While  LC might not like it, I know my group likes the occasional "slapstick" event. Granted, I don't limit it to just the PCs, so that might help a bit. Usually, for my group, the ridiculous effects of a fumble helps lighten up the mood of an otherwise really sucky roll.

[Kirksmithicus]

1. Pointy eared races
2. Settings where magic is overly common
3. Settings where magic is for sale.  In my opinion magic items should be rare and totally unique.
4. Dungeons that hold anything other than a foul smell and prisoners.

[Raelifin]

1. Pointy eared races
2. Settings where magic is overly common
3. Settings where magic is for sale.  In my opinion magic items should be rare and totally unique.
4. Dungeons that hold anything other than a foul smell and prisoners.

I like the way you think. :yumm:

[Matt Larkin (author)]

1. Pointy eared races
2. Settings where magic is overly common
3. Settings where magic is for sale.  In my opinion magic items should be rare and totally unique.
4. Dungeons that hold anything other than a foul smell and prisoners.

I like the way you think. :yumm:

Ditto. Except that gnolls have pointy ears, and I like them. And other canine races.

Ooo, maybe elves should have big old floppy furry golden retriever ears in my next setting. And big slobbery tongues.