| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
No time travel. And no characters that came from the past or the future. Alternate worlds only with my permission.
No Earth/D&D setting crossovers. Those are separate meta-universes.
You can't play fictional version of yourself, ever, nor can use your own name for your character. I have a bard's tongue and I don't want to try what might happen when I say that X died.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16
|
I have basically blocked teleportation magic in my world. It's done for some control as well as to explain the state of the political forces in my campaign.
I stopped using the Deck of Many things after I became 14 and realized the silliness was just a bit much to be used semi-regularly (it was also just a regular magic item back in the old days :P)
I don't listen to people who think that using a Deck of Many Things is a sign of immaturity. ;P
I've used it to great effect in several campaigns. It's part of a classic 1e AD&D nostalgia for some of us.
I generally don't make a lot of use of save or die effects, I don't generally use blasphemy as often as I could, and I don't play tactically on the board to challenge my players unless the NPC is likely to do so. I try to get into my NPCs' heads and do what they would do even if it's not optimal on the grid.
|
As a GM, I won't engage in detailed descriptions of intercourse with another player, who chooses to speak very loudly, in a public location where children are present, while said player clearly describes what he wants to do, and the previously stated children's parents are giving said player dirty looks. And thankfully have only had to enforce that rule once. Man, the memories these threads dig up that you try to hard to surpress.
I don't think I ever intend to use a Deck of Many Things unless I build a campaign that specifically revolves around it. I can't remember the last time I gave the party a wish, but when I do I don't try to read it in such a way as to screw them over.
Speaking of, I think I might actually give a party a wish now. They're all low-level guys, but a single wish isn't going to end the world.
I dislike teleportation and resurrection, myself, and have removed such magic from my game. I also dislike invisibility and scrying, but neither has been banned, nor am I likely to ban them.
I don't like the preponderance of magic items, either. Still working on a way around that.
My oddest hatred, however, is probably for small sized humanoid races. I DO NOT like them, and I don't know why.
I don't like swarms.
|
For me? No team-killing unless you're evil or have good/drawn-out reasons to kill or imprison your target, and then only in the end-game.
This way, someone who wants to, or unintentionally ends up causing harm to a team-mate will tend to get turned upon by the rest of the group. Normally, the player of the nefarious character will get an out-of-game reprimand that he is going down a path that will result in his character getting beaten up and thrown in prison, the ocean or to the dire wolves.
However, if everyone has hit level 20 and they've achieved the grandest goal they all aimed for together, they're quite welcome to ignore retirement, starting cults or ascending into energy beings by ending things in a massive quadruple-cross. At least it'd be entertaining for everyone.
I always use the wish guidelines from Dragon Magazine #49:
The General Principles of Wishes
I: Wishes are 9th-level magic spells and are limited in power accordingly; Limited Wishes are 7th-level spells which are even more limited.
II: Wishes cannot change what has already happened, but they can be used to alter or negate the result of some prior happening.
III: Wishes cannot directly affect that which will happen, except in the sense that everything that will happen is a direct result of what is and has been happening.
IV: Wishes are bound by the laws under which they themselves are brought about and used.
V: Wishes have no authority and no power over the abstract, the insubstantial, or the non-concrete.
VI: Wishes will always act in the simplest manner possible while abiding by the wording of the Wish itself.
VII: Wishes are general-purpose spells, and as such may be used voluntarily in a number of ways, with varying chances for success.
VIII: Wishes will rarely achieve more than one end, and never more than two.
IX: Wishes will fulfill, to the limits of their power, not only the desired end but the means by which that end is brought about.
X: Wishes are impartial, objective and consistent.Of course, if a god chooses to use alter reality, these guidelines are out the window. But for general purposes these do nicely.
Wish is an event in my game. It's not cheap. It costs you time, money, and other stuff you might not know about before you cast it. Such is the nature of great magical power. You don't just flick your wrist and forget it like it's a cantrip.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"You-be-you" campaigns. Won't run 'em.
I don't like time-travel in games. It really makes things complicated.
I'm not a big fan of the PCs having godlike or cosmic power-- which is one reason I've pretty much quit playing Amber Diceless Role-Playing or Mage: The Ascension
I don't think it's fair to the PCs to make them encounter foes that just destroy their stuff, like rust monsters or disenchanters. They just seem cheesy to me.
I'm not a fan of using "dirty trick" monsters that punish PCs for doing sensible things. So I've never used ear seekers or mimics. This just encourages them to be even more cautious, slowing the game down for no good reason.
I don't like to get too graphic with sexual situations, although I will include such scenes if it's vital to the story.
I don't like any game system which lets the game mechanics get in the way of the story. The mechanics need to serve the story, not the other way around. (RoleMaster, I'm looking at you!)
Speaking of RoleMaster, I don't like any system that takes five minutes of real-world time to determine the outcome of a single combat action. (Attacker rolls to hit. Defender rolls defense. Attacker rolls to counter defense. Hit is determined. Roll on the combat results table. Table shows a Critical Hit! Roll on the Critical hit table. Now roll normal damage. Now roll critical hit result.)
On the other end of the scale, I don't like RPing in total free-form games that don't have any game mechanics to speak of. I need to know with some level of objectivity how good my character is at doing stuff. (e.g. does he drive like Mario Andretti or my great-aunt Louise?) I will never run one, and I've played in enough of them to know that I'll never play in another again.
Multiclassing. I don't like keeping track of their characters' stats and most of the time the people that try to do it can't do it. I'll allow it if you REALLY show me you know how.
I also don't allow any characters without a meaningful backstory. I like to add in encounters and such that reference those backstories...makes it fun for the players.
I've also gotten rid of Teleport. I sometimes get rid of the spell Comprehend Langauges and Common as a language, giving the PC their county/kingdom language for free instead. My Deities don't have character sheets.
|
In my game the wish spell is not the same as a proper [b]wish[/i].
A proper wish, in my game, has only these restrictions:
No wishing for more wishes
No making anyone fall in love with you
No unmaking reality
No defying/seducing/slaying or otherwise messing with deities
No killing people
But, if you somehow get a ring of wishes in my game, or stumble upon a bound genie who can cast the real thing... that's a world-changing event.
Extreme but entirely plausible options for wish include:
freeing Rovagug
immortality
endless wealth
invulnerability
an army of linnorms who instinctively do your bidding
destroying Tar-Baphon's phylactery
Removing all of the Tarresque's DR, immunities, resistances and regeneration
etc
etc
We've only ever had one.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't like any game system which lets the game mechanics get in the way of the story. The mechanics need to serve the story, not the other way around. (RoleMaster, I'm looking at you!)
Speaking of RoleMaster, I don't like any system that takes five minutes of real-world time to determine the outcome of a single combat action. (Attacker rolls to hit. Defender rolls defense. Attacker rolls to counter defense. Hit is determined. Roll on the combat results table. Table shows a Critical Hit! Roll on the Critical hit table. Now roll normal damage. Now roll critical hit result.).
I have the opposite view of Rolemaster. Sure there is a lot of pre-game set up but the game flows so smoothly and fast and it allows for the cinematic.
Combat is quick - once your opponent loses an arm or leg or has their intestines spilling out and are bleeding profusely (unless they are mindless or the DM is stupid) they are going to pull out of the fight.
D20 is just Rolemaster divided by 5.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't ban anything in the core rules it's my job as a DM to make the game fun for the players. I get the best reward when the players tell me that it was a fun game and they talk about it until the next session.
If I am saying no you can't have this or do that or all these things are banned then I am rigging the game in my favor. As the object of the game is not for GM to win but everybody to have fun rigging the game takes fun away.
That is not to say I don't discourage things that wont fit in with the genre.
I make the players face the consequences of their actions.
If players teleporting all over the place robbing people then the rich and powerful will start developing strategies and tactics to stop them.
Teleport has a good chance of failing and something unpleasant happening (I lean more to the old skool unpleasantness).
The golden rule is if the players can use it then so can the monsters.... If the monsters have a high intelligence then they will use highly innovative tactics.
For example the party has gone on a teleporting robbery spree... The thieves guild has learned of this and they wait for the party to gather all their loot in one place and rob them using the same tactics and to and insult to injury the thieves booby trap the remaining treasure with level appropriate death and destruction.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No battle maps or figures--I run RPGs as games of imagination, not tabletop strategy.
4e has spoiled me when it comes to DMing, so I won't run other editions anymore. Not so surprisingly, because 4e eliminates a lot of the problems that others have mentioned in this thread, and which I used to not do either.
I can't be bothered to calculate XP; I do enough math in school. I've been considering a simpler house rule system that doesn't require a calculator, but haven't settled yet.
Also, no time travel. Don't like it in science fiction, like it even less in fantasy.
Also, I've never run modern, futuristic or any combination thereof. I have a mild interest in GMing some kind of supers game, but that's about it outside of fantasy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I also don't calculate XP for systems that have levels (like Pathfinder) rather than spent XP (such as WoD). Like Tequila said, I did enough math in school, and I hated it. Players level when they get to certain points in the story.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm known as a pretty giving GM. You want to play an unusual race? Awesome, I've got the Advanced Race Guide PDF on my laptop; have at it. Evil in a non-evil campaign? Sure. I won't ban any spells. The fun of being a caster is all the cool spells you get to choose, and you have wait a while to get the REALLY awesome ones. You've earned it. But I do have one major mental block that I absolutely cannot get past:
I HATE guns in fantasy. I might run it in the right system, but never Pathfinder/3.5. There will never, ever, ever, ever be a gun in my campaign, nor will there be a gunslinger. Guns are so blase. Cast a damn fireball. Slay a dragon with a sword. BE FANTASTIC!
As of now, just the antagonise feat. <--It kills immersion for me.
The synthesis is coming close though, not because I think it is OP or broken, but because of all the rules exceptions.
As of now, just the antagonise feat. <--It kills immersion for me.
Oh, yah, I even forgot about its existence. To quote a passage from my house rules document:
Antagonize [APG]: Does not exist. Move along citizen.
The synthesis is coming close though, not because I think it is OP or broken, but because of all the rules exceptions.
No one asked for playing Summoner, yet. Synthesist is one I would be wary of allowing into game due to the number of needless complexities.
I can't be bothered to calculate XP; I do enough math in school. I've been considering a simpler house rule system that doesn't require a calculator, but haven't settled yet.I just multiply the CR by 300 and divide by the number of characters. It's a lot easier than messing with the table.
I'm thinking of something even simpler, like "It takes 100 XP to get to any next level. I'll award 10ish XP to everyone per encounter, based roughly on how hard I made it." That's about as much math as I'm willing to do to give players an idea of when they'll hit next level.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Things I ban/avoid when I GM (D&D):
Firearms of any kind. The gunslinger concept is borderline special needs to me.
Multiclassing for bonuses. If it doesnt fit into whats happening to you RIGHT NOW in the story I cant allow it. "Im taking a level of Barbarian so I can rage now". No you're not, move along.
RP'ng Sexual encounters. Not just no but hell no. The game table isnt a therapy group for your inability to "close escro".
"Insta-win" spells like Baleful Polymorph.
The Annis Hag. We'll never get those 30 mins of gametime back after giggling over the Anus Hag.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I ban Guns. Mostly because I don't like them. I have other classes I'm restricting where they come from, but I'm just not letting guns in at all.
I ban level dipping. I hate when people taking one or two levels of a class so they can get 1 or two abilities and then they never take it again.
I banned Masterwork Transformation due to a bard's constant whining when he got reminded he had to spend money to make things masterwork. He kept wanting it to make him a ton of money with no expenditure of money on his part. So I finally banned it flat out from my table.
Restriction: If I don't own it, you cannot use it.
Restriction: Non-core races are available after you reach a certain level.
Restriction: No evil characters unless it fits the campaign theme.
General Ban: Anything that messes with the souls of the unborn, time travel
I don't ban a whole lot because I have been gifted with players who don't min/max or powergame. I haven't had any abuses since I began GMing Pathfinder, so hoorah for my players being nice to me.
I don't ban anything. I just make it very clear "anything your characters can use so can the bad guys".
Considering I run a 3.5/PF hybrid game, I think it's interestingly telling that the only thing my players consistently revoke from themselves (and thus the enemies) is the 20/20/20-DEAD rule.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I try to be very lenient with what homebrew, supplemental, and 3PP materiel players may have. If they homebrew something or find a homebrew online that they really like, and it doesn't look horribly balanced or unsuited to the campaign, I want to be able to let them use it. Same with supplements and 3PP, including 3E/3.5 materiel alongside that for PF. At the same time, just because it doesn't look unbalanced at a glance doesn't mean it isn't. So, what I do is make the first house rule on my list read "If the GM allows something that later proves to be unbalanced, the player may be asked to modify or replace the option in question.". So, I'm very likely to let you try out that homebrew or 3PP thing you really want so that you can have the character you want, but it balance problems arise, I will either fix them or ask you to find another option to replace it. I think this is a reasonable compromise. The players get the leadway to try out all sorts of stuff, and the players have been fairly warned that I will handle balance issues if they crop up, including possible revocation of what I previously allowed.
Another thing I have not used yet is incorporeal undead.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've never been able to run a module of any kind successfully. When presented with options A, B, or C, my players always take Q. So I end up winging it, anyway. My "written adventures" are a page or so of notes, printouts of monsters and NPCs, and the treasure list.
I don't use XP.
Same here. They hit what seems like a good milestone or it's been quite a while and they seem to have earned it and they level. I'm the DM; I can do that. :)
i do not dm for anyone younger then 18 because most of my stories offer as much sex as they do violence, similar to anything written by robert e howard. the western conservative prude culture offends me.
the two rules that i use as a gm is theme and party cohesion.
1 no pvp.
2 theme trumps all. any race, class, alignment, item is allowed if it meets the theme of the sorty arc/ adventure path.
everything that has been published by pathfinder and dnd 3.0-3.5 is okay with one exception.
i have recently banned dwarves as a pc race.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't run adult encounters. I have a wife for that.
Best. Reason. Ever!
everything that has been published by pathfinder and dnd 3.0-3.5 is okay with one exception.
i have recently banned dwarves as a pc race.
That is one seriously out-of-the-blue exception.
my player's and I have a nuclear nonproliferation agreement regarding the spell astral projection. They dont use it against me, I don't use it against them. During the 3.5 days, Mordenkainen's Disjunction was included in the agreement, too.
All dwarves or just scottish ones?
Funny... I'm hijacking the dwarves in my world to be the dwarf version of imperial Rome. Scottish, they're not.
Oh nice. 'Et tu, Hrothgar?'