Multiple player movement [on hold]

I’ve always thought it strange that, in D&D 5e combat, players move one at a time. This never felt realistic to me. Why, in a room of 6 combatants, does 1 player (and 1 player only) get to move 30 feet and take an action before anyone else even gets to move? Wouldn’t all 6 players be moving at the same time? You mean as I’m charging that monster, the monster is just standing there waiting for me to run 30 feet to reach it? Wouldn’t the monster be moving as well…maybe even away from me? If I get to move within 5 feet of a monster (after being 30 feet away) in order to attack it, couldn’t the monster, in theory and at the same time. be moving away from me so that I never catch it and can’t attack it? If I get to move first and attack without ANYONE getting a chance to move, that seems like a HUGE advantage to whoever has initiative.

So is there a way to keep track of EVERYONE’S movements BEFORE the attack/action phase? Does a “reaction” have any relevance? Or is it really a “I get to go first and then you get to move when I’m done” kinda thing? If that’s what it is, that seems really lame.

How to have a continous player experience in a setting that’s likely to favor tpk?

I am planning to design a Adventure which has a strong political flavor and is taking place in the Nine-Hells. Its gonna be an evil campaign. I plan to let the heroes start at level 15 and require the group to be lawful, as long their Character has no background provided, that clearly prevents them from turning against each other. So they at least have a chance to withstand the dangers of everyday life the 9-Hells are bringing.

But when I started designing all the Political party’s and hidden forces being involved into the plot it started reminding me a bit on the first 4 seasons of Game of Thrones. And I started realizing that a single bad decision might lead to forces turning against the party, even a group of level 20 heroes is unlikely to survive. I mean its the powerplays of arch devils the group will be taking part in.

I could mitigate this to some extend by a NPC that is a spy for the opposing political party getting intel from the group, becoming not a spy anymore and some yet unknown NPC being the plot relevant spy and such alike. But in other situations like siding with the wrong forces in a battle taking place, might inevitable lead to a TPK, as I can’t see how I could reshape such an complex plot just on the run.

So given that wrong decisions are likely to lead to a TPK, how can I ensure the players still having an continuous experience of the adventure, despite they will be very limited in recreation of new characters? As the characters are required to have specific intel about the plot and what the previous party figured out to be going on hidden in secrecy.

I could imagine that a new group simply could be a special force of one of the Lords the party was working for and simply being briefed about what they need to know. But I fear, being dispossessed by the freedom to design their characters background, makes it feel not like their character anymore from the moment the first TPK happened.

How do I handle a player who wants to burn everything down?

In my most recent adventure, the party was attacking a wooden goblin fort when the dragonborn PC had the bright idea to use his fiery breath to burn it down. I thought that it was a clever idea and was glad that he thought of it, but I am wary of letting this become the solution to every problem (especially as an adventure in the near future may involve exploring an evil forest). The reason that I am worried about this is because I think that burning down a building from the outside will often be a lot less interesting than exploring it and fighting its denizens.

How can I prevent a player from burning down everything to solve problems?

Note that I am not particularly concerned with whether or not dragonborn breath is capable of setting something on fire. I don’t feel like just telling the player “the rules say that you can’t do that” would be a fun solution. I want to keep things fun but also prevent the game from getting completely out of control.

Is it wrong to ask a player to justify their character’s actions?

When a player has their character do something completely outside of the perceived norm for that character, is it okay to ask them for a justification?

If they can not give satisfactory justification, would it be appropriate to have them take another course of action?

In my group, one of the biggest issues is meta-gaming. Characters doing things that they would have no cause to do, simply because their player has privileged information. It’s gotten so bad, my only recourse when I’m DMing has been to ask players to justify their actions. Some of my players are against this; others find it annoying, but understand as they have to do the same.

Even more so, though, we have an issue with people acting… well, random. Quite often, they will pick the most direct route to solve their problems, while completely ignoring anything near standard cultural norms, or even basic common sense. They will do things that, in any form of society, will get them into no end of trouble. Often times, their characters act more like a collection of stock cartoon-gags than actual people. Our group doesn’t have a regular DM because of this very issue. No one is willing to try and put up with dealing with the rest of the group as characters.

I tried providing in-game consequences for their actions. They were arrested, and then immediately assumed it was tantamount to a tpk. When I, or anyone, tries giving actions consequences, it only ever frustrates people, as one of two things will happen; either they continue acting random and without fail get their characters killed, or they throw on the breaks so hard to do a 180 with their characters’ personality that you can almost hear it.

The group averages from 19-24. It’s never been larger than six people, including DM. None of us can find a new group; we can never be sure what day we can meet, we’re the only players in a ten mile radius, we’ve all invested time and money into the current game and don’t have enough of either to find a new one, and there aren’t enough players to give up even one player, as every time we’ve added a player, they’ve left within the month because of scheduling issues.

So, we considered just making it a requirement that any given action taken by a character is subject to DM scrutiny, and will be ignored and re-done if found unsatisfactory as something said character might do. Is there any issue with that?

iOS HTML5 + fullscreen/native video player

Is it possible to utilize the “native” video player spawned from the HTML5 video element, but control over the “bouncy borders” as illustrated in these capture:

Specifically we want it to be auto zoomed in already from the get go, with no letterboxing, bouncing or other border-y behavior. Additionally, is there canonical documentation and terminology to describe these behaviors?

Google searching these things always red herrings out onto non-native HTML5 control.

Environment for this case is specifically iOS + Safari

On that note. Tightly related, but separately, if HTML5 is our only option (apparently practically available since iOS 12.2) does anyone have examples of a full screen, no letterboxing/status bar, HTML5 video player working for iOS + Safari?

A player made a 4th-level character for our new game and didn’t tell me. Now what?

I started to GM 5th edition D&D a few weeks back; I am running them through the Lost Mine of Phandelver adventure.

After a few games I’ve almost already killed two new level 1 characters but I was intrigued about how the 3rd player’s character didn’t seem to be fazed. I mentioned in passing, “Wow, you should be pretty close to dying!” (having been hit by three goblin-arrows), to which he replied: “No, I am at 44 health.”

Then I asked his level and he replied, “Four.”

He never mentioned at all that his character was level 4. He helped everyone else (including me before I decided to GM) make a new level 1 character. The module is for level 1 characters. He wanted to play this particular module because the specific character he is playing has never completed the module.

I am at a loss for what I should do. I considered a few options:

  • Find a way to activate a spell that curses him to level 1.
    • Since I am so new to GMing and 5e, I am unsure if that is a viable option.
  • I also considered just making everyone else level 4 and having him help level everyone else up for the session.
  • Raise the monsters levels for the rest of the adventure.

    • But, I’m sure the level 1 characters would die from the extra damage and I would have to pore over the DMG, which I haven’t bought yet. (I’m using the DMing info in the Starter Set.)
  • What if anything can I do here?

  • Should I raise the monsters’ levels to keep it fair and challenging, or just overlook the ‘oversight’?
  • Should I require the person to stop what we are doing (in the middle of the goblin cave), and force him to make a new level 1 character and reintroduce his character to the group?

Any help would be appreciated.

I am also going to ask other GMs I have played with in the past for any ideas. I will look over any answers I get here after the game session. Thank you all for your help.

(For reference, I started playing D&D in 2nd edition, up to and including Pathfinder, 3e, 3.5, and various other games. I did not play D&D 4e.)

To answer a few questions that your various responses left for me:

  • It was his idea to start running a game.
  • There are 4 of us [originally 6 but one had to drop out and the 5th had been stuck in a ‘working on Friday’ loop, leaving 4 [3 plus GM]. He [lets call him 4B] gave the idea of everyone making 1st level characters [where my assumption that he was level one to begin with]
  • I do not believe 4B was trying to pull a fast one on me, or trying to cheat. I have not been able to get a copy of his character sheet to look over anything. We used just the core book, no other books [PHB]. We used backgrounds [there may be some bonuses coming from there].

As for solution options, I have strongly considered either leaving things as they lie and have the goblins target the big buff fighter type that cant see in the dark, or asking him to revert his character to level one. Since 4B is hosting D&D at his house, I worry about how he may react to this. I have considered hosting the games at my house. I like the idea that he gets a visit from a Godly source, but i am unable to get an answer from him on his characters beliefs.

I have already taken steps to possibly avoid any version of him using player knowledge through his character. [Mind you, I am not saying that he is doing this in any way; he has told me he would not do that and has so far shown it through his character’s actions that he ‘doesn’t know’ anything.]

One step was to change some of the details of the rooms:

How can I deal with a player trying to insert real world mythology into my homebrew setting?

I have just started GMing a homebrew campaign with a group of relatively inexperienced players. I have only played with one before(I have GMed him as well as been a fellow player with him) and he is notorious for being a problem player. In fact, I know of at least one group who refuses to play with him anymore. Problems in the past have included dice fudging, not taking full amounts of damage in combat, stealing the spotlight from other players, and a number of other annoying things. All that said, I have known this guy for a while and consider him a friend.

The setting I am running is a generic fantasy world, loosely based on the Forgotten Realms, using the same gods and lore. I typically allow my players to take part in the world building process, so they feel like their characters belong. However, this problem player is obsessed with Celtic and Viking mythology and has been attempting to insert them into the world, even naming his half-elf barbarian a very long and hard to pronounce Gaelic name and saying that he is from a place called “Ironland”. At session zero, I tried politely explaining that there are no Celts in this world and suggested saving these ideas for a future game. This resulted in him pouting in the corner for 20 minutes.

Has anyone else ever dealt with a player trying to insert real world mythology into a game? Am I being too overprotective of the world I am creating? Should I just allow him to create his own corner of the world?

I appreciate any advice anyone has.

As the dungeon master, how do I handle a player that insists on a specific class when I already know that choice will cause issues?

I agreed to DM Dragon Heist for a group of my friends. One of them wants to play a wizard. Based on past experience, I know that she will ignore the prepared spells and just cast anything she wants. Our previous DM attempted to keep her to the rules, but she wore him down and eventually he caved on multiple occasions. Because of this, I recommended she play a sorcerer. While I don’t think this will stop them from trying to cheat, I’m hoping it will at least help with the type of issues she caused in the previous campaign. She’s also the least experienced player in our group, doesn’t usually play attention, and rarely even remembers to bring her character sheet. She is ignoring my recommendation, though, and insists on playing a wizard. I’m not really sure why, other than she knows that I don’t want her to play one.

How can I best handle this situation? I would love to exclude her from the game, but I already know that the remainder of my friends would be unhappy. I can allow her to play a wizard, but based on prior experience I know that she bends the rules and I really don’t want to DM a campaign where one or more players are cheating. I know that eventually she’ll lose interest and stop showing up to the game, but I would prefer to deal with the issue now. Also I’d rather address it now, than have to argue with her every single session. I’m worried about setting the precedent that her player can do absolutely anything that she wants.

I offered to let someone else DM, but no one appears willing to. The previous DM seems to need a break, and will only be a player in this campaign.

Based on the comments, I get the impression that the general advice is that I should just stop worrying and let my players have fun even when that means ignoring the rules.

TLDR: One of my players chose a certain class, but I am concrened that allowing them to play the class will create problems and drag the game down.

Could someone help me in writing a list of outcomes on a d20 to show what happenes to a player when attempting something?

I am a new DM, just started getting into the world of D&D. I am confused with the outcomes of a d20. Example, A player roles a d20 to check out a stone carving in the wall, she roles a 4. What would happen with this result? Does she trip over? Does she lose his shoe? Does a Goblin jump out of a bush behind her? I dont know how to dictate d20 outcomes without a list. Could someone please help me with a list of outcomes? Any help will be greatly appreciated.