Home
Artists
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register
Partychan Telegram Live Sex ThePornDude
Home Artists Posts Import Register

Dungeon Court Submission Please! (Patreon)

Published:
2022-07-20 17:29:18
Imported:
2022-07

Content

Howdy folks. Lowly Bailiff Jake here. The Supreme Crit is convening soon so submit your (BRIEF, I beg!) cases on this thread and we will bring you swift justice.

Love,

Jake

Comments

Anonymous

I prostrate myself in front of the almighty justices and I guess I meekly wave at Jake. I present to you the case of the slaughtered wizard. A while back, during my first ever D&D session, I played a wizard named Pelegrandious Smith. Our party was tasked to gather information on a slew of murders and we were pointed towards a local cult to start our questioning. Upon arriving at the cult camp grounds none of the cult members would talk to us until "he" came. We tried talking to many cultists and they each stonewalled us and told us to wait until the evening. We waited and eventually they started a ritual to summon a giant fire elemental. When attacked by the elemental Pelegrandious Smith fought bravely, reducing the monster in size. However, when other party members trying shooting arrows and attacking the monster the Dungeon Master said everything was flying through the monster and that we couldn't tell if it was having an effect. Shit. While Pelegrandious stood his ground the others turned towards the cultists, attacking the summoners. Also wrong! Apparently they were trying to control the monster and attacking them was making things worse. Well at this point it was too late and Pelegrandious fell and critically failed a death saving roll permanently killing him on his first adventure. The rest of the part fled and was able to to escape with their lives. I was pissed, nothing we did pre-summoning worked and nothing we did post-summoning worked. The solution was to apparently not wait around when the cultists stonewalled us. So I ask, was I right to be pissed about this brutally hard first task or I am being an overly sensitive wizard. RIP Pelegrandious Smith.

Logan

Honourable judges and the human embodiment of a kitten being lifted by the scruff of its neck, the bailiff Jake, if it pleases the court I present the case of the clown in the horse. My players and I were playing a fairy tale based game that I was DMing and I encouraged them to play fairy tale characters. One of the players decided to fill the role of jester. In the game the players had to find clues in little glowing bottles to find a princess that was taken by a dragon, and I decided to put one of the glowing clues in the body of a dead horse. I asked one of my players if this was too dark and they said it was fine. Through more discussion we found out that the race they were playing (the clown race) could fit in spaces as small as 1 foot. And then found out that a horses throat is as big as one foot. So, naturally, during the game the jester character decided climbed through the horses throat to find the clue while the whole party looked on in horror. The other players, while laughing and agreeing the move was dark yet funny, tried to argue against it saying that it shouldn’t be possible. To me I found it seemed to work with the mechanics of the race, so I let it happen. Was I in the right to let this play through? Or should I have stopped the player from making this terrible display. I wait for you ruling and accept it humbly. (A quick addition, the jester was allowed to know one of the clues places as they were playing a sort of idiot savant)

Brittney Bee

May it please the fabulous justice Axford, the wonderful justice Tanner, the talented Bailiff Jake and I guess justice Murphy as well. I had a game about a year ago that ended because people didn’t respect the DM wishes. I was a player in this game and the previous session our dm made it known that she was tired of us constantly splitting the party and not working together. We promised we were going to regroup so we could start the next leg of our adventure the arc for our yuanti bard-warlock, who, in character, we all promised we were going to help. However at the start of the session, we were all still spit and were trying to get back, when the bard-warlock just decided to go off on their own because no one was there to come with. When we confronted the player about this and said “we were coming back to help” he got all defensive saying that “no one was coming, like they said to help so I might as well just go alone.” This among other factors led to that being the last session of the game so I humbly ask the crit were we right to be mad at him for not waiting for the party to be back together, like the dm asked us to?

Anonymous

May it please the Bailiff, My players have fallen in love with one of my npcs. Her name is Elaine. She was supposed to be inconsequential, just the wife of a professor that they are helping out. However, as soon as the met her, they find any excuse to talk to her and show up at her house to just hangout there. They have been trying to convince her to join them on their interplanar travels, and despite her repeated “no’s” they keep trying to convince her. They don’t seem to understand that she is just a commoner and lives a nice married life. Should I cave in and have her join them (I was thinking she could become a barbarian?), or refuse their wishes? I humbly await your judgement.

Marissa Mars

Hello Benevolent Judges, Axford, Murphy and Tanner, and the teenie tiny little pocket sized bailiff. I present to you the case of the FORCED age up. When I first started playing Dnd I only had NADPODD as an example so naturally I made a character based off of the Green Teens. He was a 14 year old ball of sunshine. He liked to give out information packets about the Green Teens, as well as did other charity works, but I made it a well known fact that he is a CHILD and role played accordingly (ie not drinking at taverns, talking to all adults as if they’re authority, etc) Well I guess my DM felt differently about him, because after killing all of the Green Teens leaving my character to be the last one, they also gave my character a magic ring that was “left for him by his parents” after they died that when he put on and attuned to, magically aged him to be 19 years old. I was pretty upset about this and asked if I unattuned to it would I turn back into my normal age? The DM said no you’re stuck like this forever. I tried seeing the brighter side because I was a halfing and could still be the sweet boy I originally made, but am I justified to be upset that I missed out on such an important pivotal story arc of my character growing up on his own? I await your all knowing judgement (Side note: I’ve also had issues with this group because the DMs husbands character tricked my character into drinking alcohol when My character and Myself said it’s something we didn’t not want to do so obviously they have issues with boundaries from the start)

Clio
>>88074829

Obviously I am not the esteemed Justices but, to me, it sounds like if they are pressuring her to go she could just be sad and scared the whole time, missing her spouse and not used to adventuring, just give them a real sense of "you ruined this woman's nice life by not taking no for an answer, which is fucked up"

Barback of Penance

Esteemed Judges and 8 Bit book club fame guest Jake. My party and I were fighting in a deep forest Canopy describe to block out the sun. In battle with horde of undead our sorcerer was just brought up and was about to be attacked again. I asked to used Shadow Martyr, as I am an Echo knight/ hexblade warlock. I was told that do to the dense foliage around I was unable to see. The sorcerer and thus was unable to use the spell to protect him. Since we were playing theater of the mind I asked if I could move in any direction that would clear the line of sight of the foliage and the DM rule that due to the difficult terrain that we had been dealing with it would be difficult to do so. I even offered to swap places with my echo after my echo moved to gain line of sight and then use Shadow Martyr as a reaction but the Dm ruled it would still be a bit obscured because I didn’t have enough movement to get beyond the first line of trees I was unable to get a clear view of my comrades. Our Sorcerer was attacked and went down and we bounce up and down our Barbarian, who has never gone down despite hard battles ended the fight at 6 hp. It was a great adventure but I still maintain I could have had that cool moment. Can you use visibility when you are playing theater of the mind

Anonymous

Esteemed judges and okay I guess bailiff. I play a chrono wizard in a campaign that is 9 months in. I have shield, chrono shift, and luck points (I roll terribly). After deciding I couldn’t take silvery barbs (which I’m fine with since it is incredibly OP) he decided last week that will no longer tell me what number he rolled to hit - just “I hit” or “I miss”. It has severely impacted my usefulness. Is my DM being unfair? Or am I being rightfully nerfed. I await your humble judgment

Anonymous

Esteemed and benevolent Supreme Crit Justices and the ok-but-on-a-good-day baliff, I present the case of 'A Player of a hundred Characters, but None of His Own.' I had recently finished an almost 5 year campaign with the players at level 18 this past January. A player of mine has consistently made his characters a sort of a running joke throughout his D&D history; but despite the ridiculous characters, he puts forth some effort in playing them. Since finishing the last campaign, I had completely written a homebrew setting and had everyone make new characters. This same player wanted his character to be bound to a wheelchair and cast psionic abilities which are very reminiscent to that of Charles Xavier. I had told him no, for which I posed the question back to him "what does an adventuring party, which plunders dragon hoards and delves into the deepest pits of the Underdark, have to gain from bringing a member who can't reach the front door of a tavern if there are steps in their way?" He seemed despondent, but eventually caved to make an Aasimar Grave domain cleric. This same player has made characters in the past such as: A swashbuckler rogue named Chad Pizzaton, A 1000 year old dragon taken the appearance of a 10 year old girl with stone fidget spinners, and Joey Feeler a displaced card slinging ranger who is looking to return to his home of Brooklyn, New York. I ask you wise justices, was I wrong to stifle his creativity with creating a wheelchair bound character or should I allow the shenanigans of the players, I humbly await your just verdict.

Anonymous

Oh the wisest justices in the land and that one guy that reads sometimes, I bring you the story of the slaving party member. It was mid 2020, we had a dm, Jerry, that was having advancements in personal life so stepped back and became a player in our campaign. He rolled up a grung and wanted a storyline where he was redeemed from his slaving ways. The dm tried to work with Jerry on his story and even created a detailed black market in the city. Well we saved a kidnapped kid and killed a guy and the necromancer helped Jerry bring the body back to the black market by walking him into the city with animate dead and sold the body. He then tried to enslave all of the creatures we fought from then on to sell to the black market, trying to keep it from most party members. After this, he proceeded to ask the dm if it was okay to slightly poison and enslave the other party members to get them to go along with what he wanted regardless of how they felt on the matter. I reach out, O wise and mighty justices, and ask if he should have been permitted to poison the player characters and remove their autonomy or not, and I patiently await your just verdict.

Anonymous

To the honorable crit justices and that guy who played Hardone. I submit a case of a Nat 1 that went to far. My very first character was a Dwarven Barbarian who wanted to buy a great axe in game. Despite barbarians starting with one I eventually found a Halfling merchant who sold one to me. Later while fighting a monster on the beach I rolled a nat 1 while trying to throw the axe at the monster and it was lost to the sea. My DM then said after the battle that the great axe was actually cursed and would take the arm of the person who lost it. This severely nerfed my Barbarian as I could no longer use heavy two handed weapons. I felt this was super harsh as it was my first time playing and I was not made aware I could even request skill checks myself. (My DM only told me to pick a race and class and had only shown me how combat worked.) This would cause me to leave the campaign and almost ruined the game for me as a whole. Despite loving the game now this event still plagues me to this day. So tell me. Was the Nat 1 justified? Or was my DM’s punishment way over the line? I leave myself to the courts mercy.

Anonymous
>>88095812

For some added context the DM was not new by any means. He came with a playmat and a giant tackle box full of dice and minis. He also, for some reason, did not use character sheets and just had us use an app that tracked AC and HP. Looking back as a DM now I wish he had spent more time talking about the RP aspect and less time on flanking.

tacticalgrandma
>>88088355

Folks including Matt Mercer have developed a lot of homebrew rules for wheelchair using characters, so that players can see themselves represented in the game. I’d google combat wheelchair. Also I mean if they’re playing in a world w dragons I think their imaginations can accommodate the tavern have a ramp.

Anonymous

To the honorable crit justices and the bailiff who doesn’t get enough credit for his hard work, I bring the case of the rogue husband. I’m DMing my first campaign and ambitiously offered to homebrew a Western setting for my players because that is the setting they wanted. This is my husband’s second game playing and being an engineer he is a min-maxer. He’s playing a rogue that is frankly infuriating to fight as a DM. My poor other players are getting hammered by my enemies since I’m making them harder and harder trying to do any damage to my husband’s PC. We’ve played 5 sessions and I don’t think he’s taken more than 20 points of damage while other players have gone down multiple times in a single session. I’ve already had a chat with him about trying not to manipulate the game to specifically benefit him because it is impacting everyone else at the table. To top it off, he has stated he wants more roleplaying opportunities despite me setting up half a session to dig into his backstory and he barely spoke! Thankfully my other players have no complaints so far and have stated despite their many KOs they have enjoyed my encounters. So I ask you, do I need to kill my husband in his sleep and make him roll up a new character? I humbly await your judgement.

Anonymous

To the honorable Justices Axford, Murphy, and Tanner, and the bailiff Jake from that one show with handsome man Amir Blumenfeld*, My husband and I play in a campaign with some of our outer rim friends. The campaign members consist of me, my husband, the DM, and two other long term couples. It’s kind of a large party with 6 people, but for the most part it works. A few months ago, though, things got tense. The story: our party crossing a bridge and approaching a temple when a an illusion of giant fishy monster came out of the water and attacked us. Most of us made the save and realized it wasn’t real, but my sweet husband did not, fell over, and nearly drowned but we saved him! All was well. Turns out the guardians of the temple were some really high gnomes who were just being tricksters with their magic. 2 of our male players (let’s say Jack and Don) wanted to go murder these temple guardians. Me and Jack and John’s girlfriends (let’s say Jane and Danielle) wanted to leave it be. Even my husband agreed to leave them be. The illusion was part of the protection of the temple, my husbands character was only in danger because he rolled a nat 1 and tripped over the edge of the bridge. NBD. Jack decides to ignore us, which is his prerogative, and Jane (jack’s girlfriend) casts a spell to stop him from moving closer and murdering the gnomes. Jack turns to Jane, out of character, and says something snarky under his breath about how he’s mad she’s stopping him. Jane says something like “well if you’re going to act like that I won’t cast it.” The whole table is so tense. My husband and I try our best to resolve the tension, making jokes and my husband ends up charming the gnomes to go in search of something incredibly funny which will, in all likelihood, get them killed. Funny enough to distract most of us at the table and we were able to move forward for about 10 more minutes but then we ended the session. My husband and I were so uncomfortable with the very real relationship fight happening at the table as well as the attitudes of “if you do that, I’m going to get mad in real life.” Legit, the tension between Jack and Jane did not end at all and the way Jane shut down made me so sad. Justices, I beg of you, please tell me: should we have just let Jack murder the trickster guardian gnomes despite the majority of our party (the women, me, and my husband) saying to chill out? Or was Jane justified in trying to stop him and he was being a weeny by throwing an IRL fit about it? Respectfully, Biased *just kidding Jake, I love you, may Jesus Crit bless you and keep you and may the Natural 20 light shine upon you, and be gracious to you.