Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Cases Please! (Patreon)

Published:
2025-06-25 11:18:49
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:

Content

Heya fam! Bailiff Jake here, to announce the Supreme Crit is convening this very afternoon. Please submit your brief (I beg!) case on this thread and we will bring you true justice.

Comments

humanoidudon

to the esteemed justices and... (pause for a name i can't remember), I have been playing dnd every week at a local game store for over 2 years and my dm can't remember our names. no, not our character's names. our actual names. throughout 90 sessions our party of 5 has not changed and I would argue we have gotten close to the dm - even hanging out with him outside of sessions. he has even gone so far as to call us his friends. we don't look alike and we've been having fun, but my dm still has to think for a good minute before he calls us by our names or have someone fill in the blanks. should I be concerned? should I just accept he is bad at names? should i resign myself to the social distance he is subtly creating through nameless silences? I humbly await your judgement

The Wizard Syndicate

To the judges in their infinite glory and the bailiff in his limited capacity I ask for judgement on the case of “Reasonable Requests” I DM for my 3 friends and when this case came about we had been playing for some 2 years. We played mostly online after work, roughly every other week. The party had been split in a new city because the Rogue wanted to go meet up with his thief friends while the Wizard and the freshly rolled Bard went to a church to do some recon on some holy items they would need to fight a devil that was chasing them, and had recently kidnapped a beloved NPC. Since this was the Bards first time playing a magic user (the player had just sacrificed his first character in an epic last stand to save all his friends and raise an undead army to help in the finale) and we’d just come off of a huge fight last session, I didn’t want to do any combat during the session if possible. So when the wizard and bard went into the church they listened to a sermon about the majesty of these 3 magic items wielded by grand heroes, and how they were laid to rest here at the church as holy relics. They went to talk to the cleric running the sermon after and she showed them the cases holding the items. The wizard then cast mass suggestion and said “give me those”. Above the table I told him that the wording of the spell says you specifically have to make it a reasonable request so what exactly do you want to say? He responded “I tell her ‘give me those’”. I told him that “give me those” was a strange request for 2 complete strangers to ask of this holy woman, so she wouldn’t immediately just hand them over but instead the spell would make her more willing to help and she gave them her signature on a paper and told them that if they showed that to the king he could give them an audience and could be persuaded to help allow them to take the holy relics. (This was a way to allow the players to regroup and would let them meet the kings court which had some people who were important to the wizards backstory although he didn’t know that yet.) The wizard argued this was his first 6th level spell and since the spell worked on 12 people it should be 12 times as effective on 1 person which I disagreed with and said if he wanted to cast regular suggestion that could work but short of dominate person you weren’t going to make someone give you holy relics. The Bard then said that I was taking the fun out of it, and the wizard said he cast cone of cold on the cleric. I stopped everything there and we talked about everything and continued on later, but I’m curious. Judges was I taking the fun out of the wizards spells? Or did my players overreact to my table rulings? We still play to this day and we completed that campaign nearly 3 years ago now, but it still bothers me sometimes.

SiteZero

Hello honorable justices who can not be bought unlike the Supreme court and the Bailff Justin who gives Florida energy (in the bad way) or if we are being nice future cake conisour Baliff Jake or Wife Worm Baliff Emily. I am a long time DM who has started to introduce friends to the game that haven't had the ability to play before. Recently they have been having such much fun that they are surprising me with their friends (which I take as a compliment) this is not the case I present tho. I have run multiple books (which I alter significantly to kinda make my own campaign and just use the book for assistance with timing) and we were halfway through Out of the Abyss when one of these "new additions" asked if he could DM the next campaign. I was super supportive and excited to be a PC. This is when problems occurred. We have been running combat heavy comedic campaigns for the most part but the more we all keep listening to him planning (which he did very loudly during break times and forced conversations in that direction) he is planning a super serious Warhammer 40K political roleplay campaign and got super defensive anytime we tried to Crack anytype of joke. The other PCs and I had discussions that we didn't want to play that and voiced that to him but he just kept saying trust me yall will have fun. During the final session we all told him that another of the "new additions" wanted to run a Fallout new vegas esc combat heavy comedic campaign and that is the direction the group is deciding to go this was met with a "OH we'll see about that". The epic conclusion I had designed in my campaign was that the Demogorgon offered them a wish if they sabatoged a simple wedding and killed the Groom. What I didn't tell them and they didn't roll high enough to know is that the grom was Graz'zt and the bride was Juiblex (in a human form I made). They hijacked the systems to keep the wedding secure and weaked everything before rushing in the finish the job (kick ass right?). They all formulated the plan to finish off the the bride because she was significantly weaker. This is when "new addition number 1" (let's call him Corey) breaks formation as a monk and uses insane movement to barrel rush the groom way across the castle 1000's of feet away while saying at the table "I'm getting that fucking wish so I can wish us all into my 40K campaign, y'all will have to play it then". While the rest of the party was struggling to finish off the bride he rolls a higher initiative and gets first round of combat against the groom greatly weakening him (putting him on deaths stoop). I see that the rest of my party was about to defeat the bride, so I cheat and use Graz'zt teleport ability and just move him into the room with the rest of my party problem solved. That's when from across the table I hear "Um, Actually his ability only let's him move 120 ft" so I bullshit and say "Correct but he is using the spell which allows him to go anywhere he is very familiar with and since he was planning on getting married in the ballroom he would be very familiar with it". This gets me a sigh and his turns become I run 180ft while the rest of my party are slaying the groom getting the wish and using it to wrap up the campaign where they all either go back home or set themselves up with the life they were seeking. He refused to narriarate his ending and even took a six pack home that wasn't his. I await my sentencing for if my crimes of bending the rules to prevent someone for hoodwinking future campaigns.

Jack Bradley

To the supreme judges of the high crit, and the now even juicier balliff, I come with a confession. More than two years ago now, in April 2022, I wrote to the court asking a simple question: should the DM know how deep every body of water in the world is? And were my players right to razz me when I didn’t have it prepared? On that fateful day, the court was unable to decide as I did not give enough information - and you were right to make that judgement, as I did leave out some details which will show me to be the fool. After 2 years of hiding my shame away, i feel it’s time for me to face the facts and face my judgement. When the players came across a lake on their search for the mad mage of ravenloft, they asked me how deep the lake was. What I left out in my last submission was that, just as the court predicted, I panicked and said “I don’t know, two fathoms?!”. As you might be able to guess, I did not know how deep a fathom was, and this is what ended up with the endless razzing. Furthermore, this was relevant to the campaign as they were planning to cross the lake, and I had foreshadowed that there was something amiss beneath the surface. You can probably see why I left those details out, because it makes it quite obvious that they were right to razz me. Now I feel you can give your full judgement, and I lay prostrate for your mercy. Please don’t make me buy a lake house for my players, they would use it solely to prank me and beat me at Mario party 😩 Your humble, two fathom deep servant, JB

bekahbooks

To the Most Radiant High Priests/ Justices Murphy the Just, Tanner the Wise, Hurwitz the middling, and our Divine Shield, justice Emily Axeford Keeper of Chaos and Vibes, I, Franky D. Golem Warforged Juggernaut and Eldritch Knight of questionable memory submit this humble confession to the Church of dice Christ. In a recent session, deep in a festering swamp thick with poison gas, venomous creatures, and my DM’s lovingly-prepared environmental hazards, I boldly declared myself immune to poison gas. In truth, I am only resistant. My error was due to the quick nature of the events happening and confusing the immunity warforged have to disease and the resistance to poison and the fact that warforged do not need to breathe. Regardless my error rendered the entire toxic biome moot, allowing me to tromp through the mire like a smug, steel-plated god. The party cheered. The DM died a little inside. I seek penance for derailing the encounter and ask for guidance on whether Franky’s ignorance was player error… or simply part of his programming. With heavy plating and heavier guilt, Franky D. Golem (And his remorseful creator)

Darkrisky

The Daddy Killing Patron To the incredibly badass judges and the plain bad bailiff Jared, I give you the case of the patron-less daddy killer. There’s a lot to this case so I will keep it as brief as possible. I played a sea elf fathomless warlock of a noble background with a surfer/stoner vibe and a distrust of authority. She’s at a school to get away from her overprotective parents who sent her there with a necklace of sending. (I have explicitly said to my DM I am excited to play this class and that I did not want an evil patron.) During their adventures, my character was given a flute by an evil entity. Not wanting the responsibility, she destroyed it. As she did, her patron began to scream into her head something about freedom and “destroying all the sea elves”. Concerned, my character decides to use her necklace of sending to call her dad to ask if he knows anything about her patron. When she contacts her dad in a FaceTime-y way, her dad screams at her that she has doomed her whole city by destroying this flute. Turns out that destroying the flute resulted in her patron being released from the plane her city elders were keeping it. A tentacle then rose from the water and skewered her father. (Keep in mind my character saw all this in a “Facetime”.) My character ran to the headmaster of the school to get help and he opened a portal to her home city which was being destroyed by my character’s patron. Suddenly, my patron got sucked into the sky without any explanation. My DM then turns to me and says I’ve lost all my warlock levels and had to choose a new class! He stood there smiling at me waiting for my answer. He was surprised when I said my character killed herself and then I quit the campaign. He quit DMing this campaign after this because he “got bored”. So I ask this of you judges, was I wrong to be miffed and should have waited to see where the cool storyline he supposedly had planned went or did I have every right to be upset? I await your humble ruling.

🦋 Merryn C 🦋

To the Esteemed Crit Justices and Blandly Steamed Bailiff Jort, I bring you the case of Accidental God Cannibalism. Many years ago, in a campaign with my then-girlfriend and her friends, after we killed a lake monster in a boss battle, one player joked they took the body back to our camp to eat and we all sort of went along with it, jokingly pretending to have a BBQ. Next session, the DM revealed the monster was actually the corrupted divine body of the missing god my Gnome Cleric was searching for. I was distraught. My character absolutely loved and worshipped their god and would never eat her. I immediately sought to clarify the other player was only kidding about eating my god, but they double downed, saying they turned the leftovers into jerky to eat throughout the campaign. I made it clear in and out of game that I wasn't okay with that, but they argued we all participated in the initial god-BBQ, and I just had to be cool with it. After lengthy debate, I managed to convince the table that we had at least not eaten the heart (which I needed as part of my quest to restore her to divinity), but it still haunts me. Justices. Was this extremely weird behaviour and I'm justified in feeling wronged, or do I need to own up to my own part in the god BBQ and let it go?

hobblelobble

Good tidings to the Supreme Crit. If it should please the Justices Murwitz and Tanner, and Bailiff Hurphy I think(?), but ESPECIALLY if it should please the stunning Justice Axford (congrats on returning to the bench, knew you had it in you, champ!) I would like to present the case of the removed training wheels. DM here! Most of my players have little to no experience with TTRPGs but are enthusiastic to learn. I told them there would be a lot of hand-holding and we would get through it together. I have tried my best to support them, even offering an optional one shot to practice playing outside of the campaign. Four of my five players are doing swimmingly! Yay players! Player 5…. Player 5 leaves some to be desired… When she rolls, we wait awkwardly over discord while her character sheet loads, then she asks me to repeat what she’s rolling and where to find her modifier. She also refuses to take notes, and the party lost critical info because she couldn’t remember anything her character overheard alone. The rest of the party managed to get the info later, but players have come to me privately to say her lack of effort is making gameplay difficult and that I as the DM should intervene… I tried to put some heat on Player 5 to shape up, telling the party I would be taking off the training wheels. I implemented some new rules: 1) If you don’t know if an attack hits your AC, then it hits. 2) If you don’t know what your modifier is, then you no longer get one for that roll. 3) Players are responsible for recaps together, I will make clarifications but will not fill in gaps. Honorable Justices and I suppose Bailiff if you have 2 cents to add, please- I am at a loss. The removed training wheels didn’t bother Player 5 at all, she just forewent her modifiers or gave a help action in lieu of rolling. I have tried chatting with her, and she insists she wants to play. Am I enabling weaponized incompetence?? I have dozens of documents on lore and world building and if this campaign fizzles before my players even reach level 3, then I shall never recover. Justices, I eagerly await your judgement.

Jay Dragonborn, Guardian of the Vibe, Honoring the Cock

Hello to the authentic, brilliant, and charming Justices Axford and Tanner, and to the awe-inspiring, brave, and cunning Bailiff Jake Hurwitz. Oh, and that fourth guy, Bradley Munchy, I guess. I present to you, the case of the unnoticed stolen Nat20. This case stems from a moment in an online game when I was sparring with an NPC who viewed my Dragonborn barbarian as his better, but, mechanically he was much stronger than me (To note, I had a +2 in STR, and was level 3, and this character had 2 attacks). During said spar, I was missing most of my attacks when, low and behold, I finally rolled a Nat20! I was elated! I finally got a hit in, and a crit to boot! But then, our party sorcerer cast silvery barbs, and, while I still hit, the sting of losing a Nat20 still hurt my pride. But this is not where my issue lies. My issue lies in that, later, when I role played having noticed the sorcerer cast the spell on me, so that losing my Nat20 wouldn't go in vain, and there could be a story beat about it later, the DM claimed I hadn't noticed it! I protested, saying that she hadn't casted it secretly, nor did she use subtle spell. The DM then made me retroactively roll to notice the spell be cast on me, and of course I failed, leaving my Nat20 to be absolutely useless, combat- or story-wise. Was I wrong to think my character would have noticed a flash of silvery sparkles, and that it could be a good bonding moment later to reconcile over the slight PvP? Or is my DM correct that the spell was cast discreetly and my barbarian was just a dunce in the heat of combat, leaving the Nat20 wasted? I humbly await your verdict, and if I am found guilty, am ready to accept my punishment.

Scarlett B

To their excellencies, Dice Christ's hands and gestures, Axford, Murphy and Tanner, and the communion wine stealing choir boy Jake. I would like to confess before the light of Dice Christ, and have my sins wiped clean. I was playing a modified version of Descent into Avernus with an online group of friends. In the first battle against a group of cultists, my level 1 paladin went down. I rolled a natural 1 on my death save, though managed to survive. I went down again in the next fight, being the only front line fighter in the group. Instead of rolling my death save, I put my dice on the 1, and sent a photo to the DM. I was addicted to the rush of danger and adrenaline of the moment, the chance that I could have an impactful death and introduce a fun new character, and ended up doing this 3 or 4 times before the campaign ended due to scheduling issues. But frankly, I don't feel particularly guilty about it because this was the only was I changed dice rolls, I am otherwise Dice Christ's faithful servant.

Petr Louda

To the Honorable and Erudite Judges of High Crit, and to the non-celebrity guest Jake: I bring to you the case of Unfair Dismissal. A couple of months ago, after getting repeatedly emotionally wrecked by NADDPOD, I joined my first ever DnD group, which I found through Discord. The group's description stated that it was newbies-friendly, and that it split its focus evenly between combat and RP - exactly the type of group I was looking for. I created my first ever character, a half-elf Wild Magic Sorcerer named Feno, and was immensely excited to delve into the realm of Dice Christ, Nat 1s and Nat 20s. Sadly, both the group and I found out quite early on that I *sucked* at improvising. When interacted with, I couldn't really draw the line between mine and Feno's personality traits, I wasn't able to devise funny or super interesting spell interactions on the spot, and the interactions Feno had with both NPCs and the other party members were bland, as I simply wasn't able to roleplay to the degree we all wanted to. The DM and I talked about it, and they said they'd try to help me learn to improvise a bit more with some special solo sessions aimed at RP. I was very grateful for that, and tried to prepare as much as I could. However, right before the next session the group had planned, I was informed (by the same DM) that due to my inability to RP well enough, the others don't want to play with me anymore, as they "imagined someone different", and further informed me I had already been replaced. Esteemed Judges, I am well aware of my shortcomings, and I was very willing and happy to work on removing them. Am I right in thinking that I was treated a little unfairly, and should've been given a chance, provided that the description specifically mentioned it was friendly to newer players? I humbly await Your judgement. Yours, Petr L.

Courtney F.

Bless me Dice Disciples for I have sinned. It has been 20 tepidly tormented years since the events of this confession. At the tender age of 15, I inadvertently ended a campaign when I quit because....well, essentially because my fighter wasn't cool enough. I can recall neither the rolls nor the reasons leading up to my leaving, but I remember the breaking point well: when MY strength check failed to save an ally teetering on the edge of a cliff but the FUCKING WIZARD pulled it off. I couldn't take the embarrassment. I left and the campaign ended. Dice Christ has walked beside me through these past 20 years when I have played any other class but a fighter. In my most recent campaign when we hit level 16, I - a full Life Cleric - briefly contemplated multiclassing into Fighter...and then the DM abruptly ended the campaign citing familial duties. Oh wise Disciples of Dice Christ herself, please, tell me, when will I have paid my dues for my 15 year old table flippin' 'tude? When do I get to be.. A super bad ass fighter in a D&D campaign?

Jackson D

To the honourable court and that little guy Jack, I present to you the case of the Long jump into Lava. Standing at a L-shaped corner of a metal platforms, our party’s Cleric did not have enough movement to make it around the corner and into melee range with an enemy so he asked me (the DM) how far he could jump. As he was standing at the ledge, I told him how to calculate a standing long jump (ie you jump a number of feet half your strength score) which would not quite close the gap… so I told him I would allow him to attempt the jump and he would close the distance with a successful athletics check. He accepted and rolled a 5 and it looked like he would fall into the lava until the hafling rogue on the other side asked if they could use their reaction to try and catch him… to which he fittingly rolled a natural two (shout out to the two crew) and the Cleric slipped into the lava and taking 18d6 damage. The issue arose when the Paladin who was next in initiative and following the clerics lead jumped across the gap, however he took a running jump and crossed to the other side with ease. A fact that caused much laughter at the table for everyone but the cleric. What ensued was an heated argument between myself and the cleric that had he known that he could take a run up he would have done so and that I should have told him those rules. His argument was quickly shut down by the rest of the table and the cleric was clearly annoyed. As a note by the next round the cleric was revived and pulled from the lava but due to the burns to his legs had his speed reduced to 10ft. I ask you noble judges, has the cleric been wronged here or had the years of razzing (mostly from the party) that have followed the event been just. For some background information, these are my childhood friends, we have played DND together for at least 5 years across three campaigns (probably 150 sessions), we have used the jumping rules frequently and this player has never read or opened the players handbook.

Casey Alexander

To the honest and true judges and bailiff jam. I present the case of the chowder incident. I play dnd with my partner and large group of friends. We always have a super great time and we play about once a week. If it’s not dnd it’s for board games or drinks. One evening near the end of session our Dm, who’s house we play at, wonder up stairs and returned with a mystery mug. It was a mug of cold fish chowder. Instantly I become nauseous from the smell. My partner is a vegetarian and was also very uncomfortable and sick . However the rest of the party did not agree. His brother and partner vouching that the chowder smelt good and they wished to partake. The session end very shortly after as the smell began to circulate through the air conditioning. Fish oder filling the room. My partner and I went home honestly a little unwell after everything went down. However my dm refuses to believe that a mug of cold chowder is a weird choice of snack for a dnd. It still gets brought up. Even insisting he’d probably do it again. Was he wrong to drink this at the table? Am I wrong for reacting so much to his strange choice? Especially when it’s his home. I await your humble decision.

Thunderous Turtle

To the honourable judges may your wisdom and beauty continue to radiate us with knowledge like the moon pickles our dice. To the Bayliff, continue to read. I'm Dming my first campaign. Spelljammer setting, corrupt armies, space rebellion. Rising evil gods etc. The party I play with can be a bit loose - Reflavoured Alchemist to make a Mr Fantastic stretchy guy with a 1950s attitude, a Simic hybrid wizard who likes to modify his own body with enhancements, a modified hadoozee monk to be more spiderman, a min maxed warforged barbarian and then the more sensible Gif Arcane Archer with a blaster and human cleric. The Lvl 4 party took a mission which was noted to be infiltrating a highly secure facility. Like one of the main antagonist military bases. I flagged throughout before they accepted and during it about very secure, dangerous, death trap if found. They met with the informant who told them about a repair team for the device they needed to steal, if they take them, they could potentially pretend to be the repair team, get in and in the chaos of stealing it escape. They flawless hijack the repair team ship. Maroon the scientists, take their outfits etc and ask about what their job is. They never ask about security around it. They get to the base, do very bad deception checks twice (think negative numbers and nat 1 predominant). Overtly bypass the security system after being stuck in front of it. They have a mini battle and then on escape I have a giant golem whomp them (they were able to identify the golem as a security threat on inital entry). Would have been a tpk but i had planned for detention drones to secure and for them to get sent to the black hole prison in this event. (Prison break arc). The party now tell me it was always my plan to just whomp them but I argued that I had always planned for a possible success though difficult and they just went in gun hoe and had some very bad rolls - also spent 20+min in the security room after they had been compromised from the mini fight which let the army prepare so they didnt escape in chaos. I await the glory of your judgement and may it rain down on whomever you see fit. P.S - The mini fight I had made was basically the stronger version of the warforged min maxed barbarian - he wanted to start the campaign being able to dual weild great swords which sounded over powered and I compromised by accidentally giving him an even more overpowered item. (First time DM). So he had to battle with a dual wielding red and blue, cracked greatsword light sabers mirror of himself. Lots of heft included. (I figured it was good bait to derail them)

Jake de Medeiros

May it please the court, although I know it will not. I’m issuing a dungeon court cease and desist towards you, the 4 hosts of NADDPOD, for repeated abuse of the help action mechanic. The rules of help actions state that one player can sacrifice their action to give another player advantage. On NADDPOD it’s not uncommon for help actions to be given outside of combat, with the player who “sacrificed their action to give another player advantage” not actually sacrificing any sort of action economy, leading to unbalanced and artificially inflated roll values. As I believe it is human nature to want to succeed at D&D, I believe Murph is more guilty than anybody else for not nipping this in the bud as DM. As such he must pay the court a fine of 10 tortle eggs, whereas Emily, Caldwell, and John only owe 1 tortle egg each. Unless of course you choose to fight me in court. I love NADDPOD, but as justices yourselves, I hope you understand that justice must be served. P..S. I love trinyvale

Ellie

most honorable supreme crit judges et al., I would like to bring not a case but a legal consultancy. I have recently joined a dating app and have sort of unconsciously been matching with a lot of other dnd players. Some of them had it on their profile, some of them revealed it later - I think I have a sixth sense for this. One has said he loves playing a paladin, another always plays a rogue, the other likes playing a warlock. I have come to beg the question. Would it be against the DnD law to try and organise a session with my Hinge matches? Just for drama. I haven’t played in a while and I’m looking for chaos although I’m secretly hoping we’ll all enjoy it so much it becomes a campaign. And what are the ethics on asking one of them to DM because I prefer to play?

Felix Principe-gillespie

To the high justices and others present, I come to you with a case that continues to rattle our table weeks later. It hinges on a simple question, can you fail a campaign? After spending months of play, amassing armies and levelling up to defend a city from the villain and his army, my players, through some of the worst rolls I’ve ever seen and some really unfortunate plays, just, lost. The city fell, and the villain killed them. We’re now getting ready for our next campaign and the feelings at the table are mixed. Most are excited to go back into the world and see what it looks like now, see if they can finish what the first party started, but two players have the opposite reaction. They have made clear they don’t want to play again if they can lose, they argue, what’s the point in all of this if at the end we can just be defeated, that I should have done some cosmic madness to ensure they won. I ask you justices, was I in the wrong, or should campaigns be allowed to fail? PS. A little extra tension has come from the fact the players happy to go back, blame the other two for the loss and not taking the final battle seriously.

Aloha Nani Simmer

New here so very sorry if my introduction displeases the court but I want to know, dear wise ones, how a player should approach a DM when feeling discouraged by the roleplay other players at the table DONT contribute. They don’t have a lot of improv experience but are experienced D&D players and DMs but one player in particular has a tendency to continuously play characters that are rude under the guise of sassy and shut down any in game conversations I have with rude quips because “that’s their character.” So in other words it’s a lot of “no” instead of “ yes and.” I want to leave the discord group (been playing for over a year) but feel it’s right to speak with the DM first and see if the problem can’t be solved before calling it quits. I trust your wise judgement lords and humbly await your decision.

SJ

Dear illustrious Deacons of the Dice and alter boy Jake, I fear my relationship to Dice Christ has been corrupted by an evil spirit. My wonderful dm got me a set of dice for my birthday. The design was inspired by the BBEG from my character’s backstory, an archfey who tricked them into a life-altering deal. Before using these dice, my character had slightly above average rolls. However, since using the archfey dice for the first time, my rolls with this character have been Murph level terrible, even if I switch to a different set of dice. It feels like the BBEG has cursed my character irl and I don’t know how to fix it. So I come to you to ask for a remedy. Do I say a hail Murphy? Do I sprinkle the evil dice with salt? Or is this the dice telling a really annoying story I have to let play out? I humbly await your holy prescription.

Claire

May it please the darling Justices, whimsical Bailiff, and the little baby boy James…. Wait…. Jakes! I think it was Jakes… I beg your righteous judgement in the case of First Ever PC vs Current PC. My partner of 4 years has DMed the only two games I’ve ever played in. In the first campaign, I played a Grung (due to mine and my partner’s love for Frog and Toad) named B, and I loved them like a little piece of myself. Unfortunately, the game fizzled out due to scheduling, so I never got to finish B’s story, or even use their new spear they got in our final session, called the Brittany Spear. In our current campaign, our party is making our way through the temples of the gods to gain enough boons to take down the demonic “Dark Mother”. I was late to a session due to my Environmental Justice class (I hope you don’t let my noble studies effect your decision), and my party was exploring one of the temples when I arrived. I was shocked to hear my partner describing the party from our old campaign as the opponents in this temple. The battle came down to my Necromancer wizard, our party’s paladin, and my old character, B, and I was devastated, unable to kill my beloved first ever DND character. My partner had even leveled them up higher than I got to play them, and used B’s Brittany Spear, which I never got to use, against my current character! I ended up sucking it up and our paladin took B down, but I’m still a little sad about having to fight my old PC. Justices and baby boy Jakes, am I allowed to be a little sad about this? Is my partner wrong for making me watch my current party kill my first ever DND character, while using their cool new stuff that I never got to use? PS: I subscribe to the Patreon and my partner doesn’t, if bribery helps my case…

Santa Grinch Hugging HumBaba and two Fairies

Can you just bless my brother for doing a good job being a DM for the first time he's taking risks which include the B squad which kind of is like a tortle tank submission but it's more like each play has 2 to 3 characters and i had two active PCs last session but we also had one player camping with his kid so his character was having some quite time in a book demi plane on paper it shoupdnt work but we are having fun and i feelmy Brother Dm deserves a blessing or Boon

WesKane

A confession of turning a vampire pc into a hackey sack. Please esteemed judges i ask for forgiveness. I ran several games of vampire the masquerade and had a trouble player. Example i asked for evil vampires and he gave me Angel the vampire with a soul. During an encounter with a gangrel boss, the vampire with a soul tried to talk it out, failed and got thrown towards his companion. I asked the companion for a roll to dodge but she asked to catch him and throw him back. What then plays out is Angel getting tossed back and forth between the boss and companion pc until it is his turn and he escapes. (He got damaged when they missed and he slammed into the wall) Please judges i feel like i might have demeaned this character too harshly and ask for forgiveness, i swear i dont secretly think im right but also dont feel too bad for the player he introduced a racists character our very next campaign and i no longer play with them.

NowWhatComix

Dearest judges of the supreme crit and whoever bothered to read the comments this time: I bring to you the case of the player-hiring player. I am a part of a discord server for a game store located in Burbank (shout out Geeky Teas!) where folks can find groups. I saw a posting about a gothic game a la mistborn and thought it’d be a grand old time! I tell them my interest, and the poster asks what I’d play. At the time, I thought cleric or Druid. I meet the other players and DM, all kind and great fun. The DM says that they’re allowing the Witch Class from WBN, and I’m hooked, stating that’ll be my character. Immediately I get a DM from the poster, A Fellow Player, stating that I was only invited to be a healer. Judges, I was not the only one who had yet to pick a class. They then continued on to say that it was fine if Witch could be a healer, but otherwise I should stick to what I said, effectively threatening my removal. I got out of dodge immediately. I ask: Was that the right call? I followed Murph’s advice, and I still think that player was being wack, but was it worth losing out on what seemed like a fantastic group?

Dean O

To the honourable justices and barsetting bailiff, I present the case of the bar fight blunder In a campaign where I was playing Kargos, a level 10 orc cleric with a cowboy hat, he had a moment of doubt about his course and (perhaps foolishly) attempted to blow off steam by picking a bar fight to by throwing a beer mug at a dwarf, however my DM decided that because I'm so high level my missile mug killed the dwarf outright! I panicked, revivified him and fled the bar before the guards came, later getting into a brawl in the street with another dwarf and being on 1hp just before our next quest, which I hadn't realised was in the same day! Should I have been punished for picking fights with manslaughter, or was the DM just jealous of my cowboy hat PS he's a great DM and a fan of the show, please keep any punishment of him light Was it unfair to

Trevor Brown

Read this notification as “cheese please” and was opening the app thinking what the hell I send you money buy your own cheese

Claire

Even if they don’t read this case, you HAVE to set this up and update everyone

Conor O'Donnell

Changing and Weaponizing Backgrounds To the Highest Crit in the land and the one trash panda in the gutter Jorn! I bring to you the case of the DM altering a players backstory and using it to ruin a character. A couple years ago I was in a campaign with a couple friends. The Dm asked us to bring character that had intricate backstories. So I came up with Ymir. A wood elf who’s family lineage was cursed long ago to appear like an ice elf as they made a deal with a Ice Devil to save their life in a moment of need. After about half a year the party needed to travel back in time and Ymir met his ancestors and stopped them from being and danger and rescued them! However the DM said that the story that was passed down from generation to generation was a lie and that the curse was actually given to them in a completely different location and by a completely different devil and that my character was the cause of the curse. This upset me because without my knowledge the dm altered multiple huge factors about my character and his backstory and then used it to punish my characters decisions in the narrative. I ask the crit, was me being mad justified or is this part of normal dnd? PS i found out 2 years later the DM was mad at me for personal reasons and was unfairly trying to ruin my fun

Peter Gorbert

To the most supreme justices and the wholey underated Balif Jeff> If it pleases the court I shall keep this brief. We're several years into a long running camapign. My players recently went to Castle Waterdeep to visit the Open Lord Laeral Silverhand. The barbarian character has arranged a meeting with her, but the rest of the party including a bard and a wanted criminal with a large bounty on their head, decided to come along. They were stopped by the attendant and informed that only the barbarian was allowed to meet with her. At this point the bard cast disguise self to make them look like the barbarian (whilst stood next to the barbarian and in front of the attendant). At this point the attendant told them they to leave. They refused so guards were summoned at which point the character with a bounty decided to cast invisibility to try and sneak in, whilst in full view of everyone and surrounded by guards. The players eventually backed down and left before a blood-bath ensued, but you could tell they weren't happy and felt railroaded. Justices should I have allowed by players to waltz in and see the ruler of a city? Was I wrong to punish my players for trying to disguise themself as the person stood next to them whilst stood infront someone? Is it unrealstic that palace guards would react poorly to people casting invisibility spells in front of them? I humbly await your judgement as this has weighed heavily on my mind since it happened.

terst

Dear esteemed judged and bailiff, I bring before you the case of the totally normal guy. My group has been playing a campaign in a homebrew setting for almost a year. Lately a new player joined the party: a human warlock who goes by Dick. When asked about his appearance, the player said that he's an average looking middle-age guy. When asked about his background, or how did he end up in the dungeon where we found him, he couldn't give any information, claiming amnesia. Time passed and he never added anything on his past, his goals etcetera. The only information the player gave us was that the character was loosely based on Richard Nixon. My character never really trusted this guy with no past, no identity until, with our group on the verge of TPK, I had to choose between trying to revive Dick, or keep fighting. Due to my character's manifest distrust for Dick, he didn't bother helping him and he failed his final Death Saving throw. Was I right to do that, or should I have put the group behind my personal distrust and distate and saved him? P.S. the character didn't seem to be bothered at all by Dick's death, and in the end we even managed to resuscitate him.

GhostToken

To the questionable judges and the baliff that's just trying to put his wife's boyfriend's kid through college, I bring you the case of fudged dice rolls? I've been running campaigns for an online group with incredible friends for two years. I've struggled to balance encounters though as my girlfriend and one other player have pretty average characters (+1-+3 on two stats, maybe one negative stat), but the other two players have consistently had +5 on at least one stat. Between their 2 characters each in two campaigns, there have been FIVE +5 stats and they have always came to session zero with their characters already created. Most of my NPCs get character sheets, and I've had maybe 2 characters out of 20+ with a +5 before level 4. Am I right to he concerned they may be fudging or even just straight up making up their dice rolls for stats?

Johnny

To Emily, may you be drinking plenty of delicious water, and to those other bozos in the room, I’ll have a cup of water with no ice, please. I bring to you the case of The Christmas Oneshot of Evil. Since my lovely wife and I moved back home, I’ve made an effort each Christmas season to host a festive oneshot for all our friends. The first year it was a PvP to determine who was the nicest on Santa’s list (4 players). The second year was a survival oneshot where other holiday patrons were invading the North Pole (7 players). This most recent session of 2024 is the oneshot in question (7 players), which has more PvP than the PvP oneshot. The theme here was everyone played a rejected, poorly constructed toy who all gained sentience and wanted to be delivered. The main issue stems from a couple of players who decided they were also motivated by more chaotic ambitions. One player, a funko pop with a football sized Megatron head and malfunctioning voicebox wanted to both become Santa Claus and mass produce more underlings…instead of getting delivered…like a toy…like we had all agreed. But judges, I’m not one to yuck on my players yum. My wife, always one of the players at my table, was a rotten potato named Spud who vowed to assist Megatron so that they might also deliver her spores across the world. Two other players are chaotic by nature and were simply down for the LOLs, while one of the remaining two players was passive, and the other was completely in shock. We’ll call this shocked player Gorf. The session involved finding Santa’s slay and getting into his gift bag. Along the way, they poisoned the elves hot chocolate, turned several elves into undead minions, nearly shoved an elf into a roaring furnace, and threatened to kill a chilly snowman for the trendy sweater he was wearing. All this pushed Gorf closer to the edge, until finally he attempted to cast Slow on the rest of the party when he was some distance away. The passive player then shot at him, only to quickly heel turn and support his side, then tried to fight off the other 4 chaotic players while Gorf ran away leaving them to fend for themselves. What followed was a quick take down of the passive player, my wife rolling death saves, and a mad chase after Gorf, who managed to reach Santa’s slay and trampled over Megatron with over 100 damage from 8 deers and the force of the sleigh. They were level 3 characters. Megatron immediately died, and the mood was only continuing to harshen. Eventually, Santa in the form of an eldritch horror (background plot) found his stolen slay, and ultimately the remaining players had to fight together, realizing that the only way to survive was for one of them to adorn all 6 articles of Santa’s outfit that they had found along the way. One of the chaotic LOL players adorned all the pieces, which I IRL gave physical clothing and props to the player to wear, turned into the new Santa Claus, and proceeded to smite the eldritch horror, and delivering the surviving characters except for Gorf. Judges, what the heck? I’m all for picking up on what my players are interested in and running with it, but poor Gorf was such a stick in the mud, that even when I threw him a bone for supporting his moral stance, he outwardly was distraught by the other players. My chaotic crew didn’t mind his opposition, but should I have tried harder to remind these Elf torturers what the true meaning of Christmas was all about? Was Gorf in the right, or was the rest of the party fair in wailing on him? P.S. The session started with them all gaining consciousness in a pile of failed toys designated to be burned, so this might have biased their views on their environment. P.P.S. Everyone left out 9 hour long session laughing and cheering each other for their antics. Ultimately, there were no hard feelings, and all my players remarked it was the best oneshot yet. But judges, just what the heck will I do next time to satiate my wild friends? Are they all on the naughty list?

Trickonometry

I present to you the case of the Above Board Rolls, Accidental Mammoth Instant Kills, and the WoW-inspired Salty Response. I’ll get straight to the alleged crime in question: I was running Rime of the Frostmaiden, and, on session 3, I ended up skewering two level 3 PCs on the tusks of an Awakened Wooly Mammoth. The fight started with the Mammoth charging the Gunslinger Fighter, rolled a Nat 20, and, with the doubled damage, took the PC to EXACTLY negative their total hit points - they were instantly killed, no death saving throws. The fight continued, with the mammoth and the party trading blows. When the Druid started to run away, the Mammoth charged them. And crit again. And the Druid went down to less than negative their max HP (by 1 point). The Crux of the Issue: Due to the setup of the game, where I was sitting on the floor and the players were on the couch, I couldn’t hide my rolls! As someone who made clear in Session 0 that I believe that danger leads to real stakes, and real stakes make the victories that much more thrilling, I figured that rolling above the board (and hiding stats/prep notes in my limited space for hiding stuff) wouldn’t be an issue! Unfortunately, that also meant that I had absolutely no way to just nudge the damage back by 1 or 2 to keep my players from instant death. After that session, when I offered to give an in-game reason for the Druid to be brought back to life (with some consequences), the player just shrugged and said, “No, I’m just going to play Arthas. Like, the Lich King from WoW.” And then that group never played again because that player was “never available” when we tried to schedule another session. I no longer make all my rolls in front of players (though I have had a couple casualties), but to this day the former Druid occasionally will make comments in our ongoing group text about how he believes fudging rolls is something all DMs should do and that PCs should have plot armor. And yes, Murph, I already have found other people to play with than this guy. My question, judges: Was I wrong for not pulling punches on my players, or was the once and future Arthas just taking the crit worse than his Druid?

Cadimilius The Consumed

To the morally dubious justices, and the moral compass that is the Bailiff, I present the case of the absent Archfey. I run a homebrew 5e campaign where the players must navigate a world where one half of the land is plagued by magic, and the other is devoid of it. During their adventure, they traveled to the Fey Wild to assess damages on magical “Ley Lines.” I had given them an introductory vision of the Fey and its courts in the form of a mushroom-induced hallucination. I described the Fey Courts as being ruled by Eladrin of their respective seasons, never once mentioning an Archfey. Fast forward a session and my players encounter the deck of many things. One PC was trapped in a gem, one PC was marked for death by a devil, and the other, against all odds, drew the Moon, allowing them to cast wish (thankfully only once) Instead of wishing their friend back, they wished for the favor of an Archfey. I agreed, thinking it would be interesting to see it play out when they get to that point. Later in the session, the player mentioned wanting to find the Spring Court and beckon the Archfey that rules it. I mentioned, AGAIN, that the Archfey does not rule the courts, and the player immediately left the call and the discord server that I host the game in. Judges, was I wrong to allow this wish, or should I have intervened? I await in my cell for your scrutiny.

Luke G

‘Sup judges, ‘sup bailiff 😎 After asking a powerful npc ally for ‘tangible boons’, our party received custom magic items, each designed to upgrade a class feature. My level 18 divine soul sorcerer received an item that allows him to upgrade his Twinned Spell meta magic option to Tripled Spell. Instead of targeting an extra creature for a number of sorcery points equal to a spells level, i can now target 3 creatures for the cost of double the spells level. Oh and I take 1D10 for each sorcery point spent. This means that were i to cast haste on my three other party members, i would take 6D10 - which is potentially half of total hp (112hp). When i mentioned that was a huge amount of damage, my party members replied with “you go heals though”. Tripled spell is an amazing ability, but i feel like the cost is too high for it to ever be worth using. Judges, am i wrong, or did my DM balance this item fairly?

Gekkogahiya

To the honorable justices and the guy who would make an okay guest on 8-bit book club.

Tuesday Cross, only here for the surf n’ murph.

Dear delicious justices and their friend Jake, I bring to you a case of GRAND THEFT 20. I paid to join a one shot at a local pub, and our DM was thirty minutes late. He apologized and I jokingly said, ‘Why don’t you make it up to us by giving us all inspiration?’ He replied ‘you all have unlimited inspiration for the next hour, AND you get one free nat twenty each to use at any time.’ Well hot and holy damn, I thought! This guy must really know what he’s doing if he’s willing to put that on the table. The DM precedes to set up an encounter which was designed to be unwinnable. Our four level 5 characters at half health were pitted against his level 20 DMPC who was described literally as the main character. The fight cumulated in a struggle between the DMPC and a cursed gem that was obviously making him attack us. My character (who Murph named ‘Clef’ from a past Council of Elder’s Q&A) approached the DMPC and attempted to remove the stone. The DM said I could try. But that even with unlimited inspiration, I’d have to do it with disadvantage. I said that’s fine, I’ll use my natural 20. The DM swore loudly, and then described to me how it almost worked, but then didn’t. I understand that a natural 20 doesn’t equal automatic success, and I do get that this was a totally unearned natural 20- but it still left me feeling scandalized. Am I right to feel like I want to throttle this guy? I humbly await your unbiased judgement.

ZZ Digital

Dearest Honorable Crits, i present the case of personal hell. The party needed to steal a gem of planes-shifting from the villains. One player accidentally triggered one, and was warped to hell, where they began to rescue NPCs important to the party from personalized hells. The other PCs encountered a villain, who offered them a gem. Because one of the NPCs i mentioned was one of their husbands. The player was so intent on getting to that scene that she didn't ask any questions, and they were consequently trapped in their own personal hell and missed it entirely. As DM, did i utterly fail to reinforce this self-admitted villain may be lying, in seperating the party at all, or does the fault lay in another aspect?

Hardwons Left Quad

To the radiant judges and the other guy who I wouldn't stop to scrape from the bottom of my shoe. I was running a game for friends back in high-school where our Sorcerer asked if he could freeze a lake with an ice blast cantrip so they could walk across. I told him freezing an entire lake would require more powerful magic than just a cantrip and he asked me what the salt content in the lake was to try and justify why he should be able to freeze it. Now, ignoring the fact that salt would actually make the lake harder to freeze, I told him if he wanted to try and bring science into our fantasy land, I would let him freeze the lake on the condition he used real world science to explain all future spells or I wouldn't let him cast them. He agreed. When it came time for him to polymorph a dragon later in the session he, obviously, could not provide a reason that real world science would allow it to happen, so I didn't let him do it and he called me "Jimmy noobtron" (my hair did look like Jimmy newtrons hair). I felt that I had proven my point about how science does not equal magic and let him cast spells as normal from then on. Should I have stuck to terms of our agreement for longer than just one spell, or was Jimmy Noobtron good enough to get my friend out of the magic doghouse? Ps. We remain good friends to this day and this event remains a constant story we share with new people at our table. p.p.s. (you dont have yo read this for the ep, i just want you guys to know) I just finished a PhD in chemistry and began listening to the pod when i started my undergrad. I want to thank you guys for bringing me so much happiness during my schooling. I would listen to you guys in the lab with a lab mate and we saw you guys live together when you came to our city and we have plans to go to your next live show local to us as well

Michael Beck

To the wonderful justice Axford and the lovely bailiff Jake, as well as the two stenographers Murphy and Tanner, I present the case of way too many familiars. So I ran a 5e game a little while ago with a few friends and my dad. One of my friends was a warlock build that had access to 3 families. One was a wizard with 1 familiar, and the party had access to a fighter a la Balnor. Now the overall amount of familiars wasn't actually the issue, the issue is the one player with 3 would bog down combat whenever it got to his turn. Now I would occasionally have enemies with big AOE effects go after them, and I also talked to him about it, but it never got resolved before the campaign dissolved. This was a problem for one of my other players and he decided to stop playing before the game fell apart. He thought I should've installed a timer for turns, but I didn't want to do that as I thought it was too restrictive. Was I right not to time my players turns? Or should I have been more strict with my player?

PlausiblyPJ

May it please the wise keepers of the holy crit and that guy who stands at the confessional and announces our sins, I come to you with a confession. 3yrs ago, I started playing in a Rime of the Frostmaiden campaign where I met my fellow players for the first time during session 1. It has been fantastic and we are all the best of friends now. However, I made a bold mistake very early on that has weighed in my conscience ever since. During our 3rd session, we were locked in a depate among the party on whether or not to assist a town in need or to allow the town to turn against the mayor which would assist the medieval Mafia that our party was loosely affiliated with. All but 1 of us was on board to become "made men" and helping the criminal organization. This player (lawful good) was threatening to rat us out if we went through with it. So... I casted Sleep on them. We then proceeded to tie them up, lie to the towns people that he was delusional and a danger to others, and left him on the side of the road penniless and alone, kicking the character out of the party and causing the player to create a new one, which they were happy to do as it was very comical. This was the point that I realized my mistake. I was playing a bard, and I didn't realize bards can't prepare spells each day. So, Sleep was not on my original spell list. I added it after a rest for this plan to work... Luckily, the campaign has continued and has been an experience we will remember forever. Our DM even made the abandoned character an ongoing villain hell bent on revenge! But I always wonder what could've happened if I hadn't accidentally broken the rules and changed my spells... I kneel before you hoping for absolution, but accept any punishment you see fit.

Kay

To the esteemed judges and lovely bailiff, I recently joined a Monster of the Week campaign with some online friends. It's a 2d6 based system and we are playing monster hunters a la Buffy. I am the most experienced player, with most others being brand new to ttrpgs, so I wanted to play more of a support role for this game. There is a half-siren, biker lesbian with a monster gf, a researcher with a secret pact with a demon, and me - Boris, a middle-aged divorced janitor, as a paladin-type protector. Here's the issue - because I'm the most experienced player, the group tends to stall out with ideas and I feel the need to jump in eventually and do something to keep the plot going. My DM also finds it hilarious to fuck with an oblivious normal-ass dude in a setting with monsters. Because of this, I've been feeling a lot like the "main character" of the campaign. Because I take more actions than the other players I've been leveling up faster than them, too. I feel bad for hogging the spotlight and want to support the other players and their characters' stories. Judges, what can I do to help the other players shine and stop poor Boris from always taking the lead?

erelde

Does pass without trace erase the slime-trail of my mount the giant snail "Escar-go" ?

NowWhatComix

More info: DM later messaged me apologizing for the player’s behavior and that they’d given them a talking to and invited me back, but I’d stood firm.

Gekkogahiya

To the honorable justices and the guy who would make an okay guest on 8-bit book club, I present the case of the overpowered party. My party consists of 5 characters who, without fail, obliterate every challenge in their way. Not one of them has actually been knocked unconscious since the beginning of the campaign, before three of the players even joined. All this to say, they are ridiculously overpowered. Would it be wrong if i made the final boss a CR22 when they're only level 15?

Kendall Bailey

May it please the crit, I submit the case of the concentrating spellcaster. I was playing a level 5 half-elf wizard in a one-shot with some friends. We were in combat and I cast Melf's Minute Meteors, I explained how six meteors floated around me, and then used my bonus action to send two meteors at an enemy. When it came back around to my turn I did a melee attack with my staff and then attempted to use my bonus action to send another two meteors at a different enemy. My DM asked, "Are those meteors a concentration spell?" I said yes. He responded, "Okay. Then all of your meteors went away when you attacked." I said, "A melee attack doesn't break concentration." He said it did. I began to protest, since this unexpected change in the rules would nerf me hard in combat. But another player at the table, who has never played as a spellcaster, spoke up and said, "He's the DM. He makes the rules." I let it go at that, not wanting to ruin the game for anyone. Later the DM and I talked about how concentration works and landed on me having to roll a check to maintain concentration during combat. It wasn't rules as written, but it was better than nothing. Problem solved, or so I thought. Fast forward to our next session, a one shot where we played level 10 characters - mine was a multiclassed College of Swords Bard/Swashbuckler Rogue tiefling. I should have smelled trouble in the air when, speaking to a devil, my DM asked what language I was using. I told him infernal, since I'm a tiefling, I have infernal heritage and can speak the language. My DM replied,"Tieflings aren't infernal, they're usually druids." I was at a loss, but he allowed the interaction with the devil to continue, so crisis averted. Then we got to the final fight with the BBEG. In combat I successfully cast Hypnotic Pattern on one of the BBEG's underlings, rendering them useless. None of the other "bad guys" attempted to free their comrade. It came around to my next turn and I asked the DM, "Do you want me to roll to maintain concentration on Hypnotic Pattern before I attack with my swords?" My DM responded, "No, you can't attack and keep concentration." I replied, "Didn't we agree I could roll for it during combat?" The DM responded, "No, I don't think you could keep concentration and do something else." Then the, "The DM makes the rules," guy from the previous session who, I remind you, has never played as a spellcaster before, chimed in, "Yeah, that makes sense." I was flabbergasted. But again, rather than make it a thing, I let the spell drop and used a spell attack instead. Am I too stuck on the rules as written? Or was the DM wrong to alter such an important rule of my action economy? I await your judgement.

Kingofanchovies

I have a confession and I pray dice christ forgives me I ran my first ever campaign and it was homebrew a world full of lore I worked on for years I invited 3 friends and they were excited to play I helped them build super involved backstories to help care for the world. As time went on only one player interacted with the world or npcs I set up cool houses and rooms and cool npcs but they never did anything, I began to despair I had to always push otherwise they would stand their quiet I began to realize I was a bad dm I slowly started hoping the campaign would fall apart for some reason because it all felt pointless and it eventually did and I didn't even try to stop the downfall now I just feel bad like maybe I didnt try hard enough im never going to dm again most likely because it went so bad but I ask that dice christ forgive me

Amanda

Confession Hello Father (catholic, get your mind out of the gutter Daddy Jake) Ms. Axford, Wife Worm, Justice… and I guess those other guys. The year is 2023, I’m in college. I had an acquaintance dm me after seeing me post NADDPOD as one of my top podcasts that year to invite me to join a group that semi-regularly met up to play and drink mead. As someone who has only watched/listened to d&d, I have always wanted to play. The confession is I knew this guy had a crush on me and got scared that my experience would be weird if he made a move so I did not join. I’m afraid I missed my one chance to join a game with at least one person I knew - playing with strangers makes me nervous. Will Dice Christ forgive me that I wasted the D&D opportunity I was so wanting?

JaytheThey

May it please the High Crit, entertain the esteemed justices and moderately engage the bailiff. I present the case of players vs the Rockefeller DM. I was invited to join a group of online friends for their Pathfinder 2e game hosted by a friend’s friend because a player had to leave due to a scheduling mistake. The campaign was designed to be an “epic level” adventure, with our characters becoming eventual demigods by utilizing a litany of homebrew rules. It sounded dope at the time but I, nor the party, realized what was in store for us. A year long campaign involving a TPK that ended the world, dimension hopping making unwilling deals with all powerful demons and, I am not being facetious, every NPC the party was aligned with betraying us. The kicker? We were unable to roleplay or converse our way out of any of these things. At every turn when the party tried to use sense motive or investigate the weird “going’s on” of the world the DM would panic and pause to use AI text generators to make dialogue or room descriptions. For a year, every time we attempted to resolve a solution without combat, killing the enemy(or more often being killed by the enemy only to be resurrected) the DM sweat flowed and no amount of conversation would resolve it. The game has since ended but I ask this of the court. At what point does the necessity of “being on the rails” outweigh the player’s desire to explore the world and have a greater sense of agency? Am I in the wrong for being bitter that my attempts to thwart threats before they became apocalyptic were met with frustrated DM stammering or should I punch my ticket and do my best to enjoy the train ride?

Connor Proudfoot

Dear Supreme Crit, I write to you for a ruling on whether I was unjust to my players, or if they brought on their own fate. I was running a session for some friends who I've played with for a long time, and my partner had joined in her first ever session. I designed a simple one shot, which was supposed to bring intrigue, combat, stealth and a final confrontation. My players were at a village tavern when some bandits came in to extort them. The players bravely intervened, but allowed one of the bandits to live and escape, then continued on their adventure in a nearby forest. They were away until nightfall, at which point they return to see the tavern in flames and the village being raided by the bandits, after the survivor had gone and reported the goings on. My players began sneaking around them, taking out a few in some wonderful stealth attacks, but then one of the group decided to dive into the middle of the whole, very large (and clearly stated very large) group of bandits, starting a large scale battle. Now, my players were low level, in order to be accessible for my partner, but they all began fighting a clearly losing battle. I tried to let them know 'this really doesn't look good... There's a lot of them' but they forged on ahead, and in the end, two died, one was captured and the fourth, a pixie, was forced to fly away. After this, one of my friends was really angry and said I killed them all, and that I could have easily made it so they didn't die, or that bandits in the dozens did less damage, but I felt that it was only right to stick with my guns and let it play out. If you dive into a small army, you're likely to be killed. I ask thee, supreme Crit, was I unjustly criticised, or should I have compromised?

Dench Judy

Valiant and tastefully dressed holy people of the church, I come to you with a curse with which I believe was afflicted upon me in my most recent gaming session for my own disbelief… I play in a whacky online game with a bunch of cartoonish characters, I myself chose to play a Zuddy inspired Grim Dark paladin/Bloodhunter and it is going great! However in our last session, we met a group of firey dwarves in a volcano on our quest to fix the natural hot springs which had run cold. I asked if I’d seen these creatures before and rolled a natural 20! I was kind of shocked and hesitated for some reason before announcing it. The Nat 20 meant I actually just knew these guys personally and it was very fun. A little later we came across their employer, a young Red Dragon (we’re level 7) and only got part way into the fight and I managed to roll 3 nat 1’s, one each round and it’s looking rough! Guys… am I cursed for not graciously accepting the earlier Nat 20 immediately? Or do I just roll like shit sometimes? I humbly await your cleansing

Felix Adams

To the blessed cardinals of crit, and the baby who rocked skaldova (thank you for inspiring my next campaign) I seek guidance for a moment in game that I know not if it was a sin. I had been playing in a group for about 6 months and things were going great except for one player, who we will call Jane. This player wasn’t too keen on playing within the rules of the game, often getting in long discussions/arguments with the dm. One session, we are in a pivotal fight that depended on one character specifically killing their parent bbeg to obtain a god heart(thank you naddpod). It was Jane’s turn and she rolls to hit, it rolls a 4. Now, at the table only I was tall enough and seated well enough to see Jane’s dice box. But in a flash the 4 appeared, Jane looked me dead in the eyes, looks away, and goes, “uhh NAT 20” and the table goes wild as Jane killed the bbeg changing a very pivotal moment in the game too. Clergy of crit, what the fuck? What was I supposed to do? Was I supposed to say something? did the dice devil speak through Jane? I await whatever punishment and ruling you declare. P.S. we no longer play with Jane, we got new friends

CharlieB

Illustrious judges and the guy who took over from Emily, I offer the case of the free fare fandango for a frustrated frozen fighting friend. I've been playing with a group of friends for years now, and we're spread out around London (went to the show at the Hackney Empire!). Like NYC, a big city with a metro system. We typically gather at the DM's flat, which takes us all more or less an hour to reach on the tube. One session our orc barbarian endured a gruelling combat of 3 consecutive rounds out of action (stunned, restrained, stunned) before being knocked down to 0HP. The character survived (thanks to the Aarakocra sorcerer - not mentioned earlier to avoid Justice Murphy's displeasure), but the player ended up doing almost nothing for the entire session. He was a little annoyed but things were fine, and he jokingly suggested he should get a refund on his tube fare from the DM since he barely got to play. The DM said "get a 000 on a d100 and I'll cover your fares for the rest of the campaign." (dramatic pause) Of course, he got it. The DM said he was joking but the player insisted, and has been keeping a running tally of the money he's 'owed'. The rest of the table is divided, with our paladin suggesting they get a refund for that one inactive session to at least make good on the dice roll. It's causing tension between the DM and player and some of us have noticed that sessions are getting less frequent; can the refund roulette be resolved before the campaign fizzles out? I await your esteemed wise pronouncement. PS the paladin is the DM's ex-girlfriend who is now dating the barbarian; that might also be relevant ok bye

Dylan the Unskhoolable

To the honorable Judges, that one guy whose opinion on aarokras i don't agree with, and the bailiff who makes some pretty good beard oil. I bring to you today the case of the melted magical items. I was first time dming when I set up my bbeg of our first arc as a vampire lord that lived in a costal light house. My players upon making it to said light house asked what it was made of in which I said it was a giant wooden cabin with a tall tower shooting up from the middle. They then preceded to go around setting the whole thing on fire (I know blunder on my part) I allowed this to happen and let my bbeg go up in flames. However since they defeated my guy so easily I told them that everything inside had gone up in flames include the super cool magic items this lead to some pretty serious back and forth with my players Justices was I right in the vegence of my bbeg or did dice devil put sin in my heart. Should I have awarded my players for outsmarting me so easily? P.s thank you all so much for what you do been listening season episode one and watching you all since your college humor days!

Magus Kunari, only knows fireball and jaegerbomb

To the honorable judges, and that one guy who's afraid of cake (Junk I think he was called?). I bring to you the case of the Main Character Appointment. I am in a campaign with 4 other people, playing a session that's 3/3 (1 day every 3 weeks playing, 1 Day every 3 weeks not playing). Recently me and another player (my cousin) have begun to notice the blatant favoritism towards one of the other players. This player has gotten a special item, an entire side story that ties into the main story, and several other perks that put them an edge above others such as an eldritch deity speaking in their mind and a talking pig's head on their shoulder that can stun . Did I mention that they're playing a fighter? (Silence Murphy). Not to mention this dm has made a player fail a roll because they seemed to feel it would better the story saying "I call DM bullshit." And nearly cost our character's lives with the danger they weren't prepared for. Me and my cousin worked hard on our characters, building them to have open ties for the story if the DM wills it. (He's playing a feral tabaxi warlock and I'm playing a dragon ranger eladrin who's accent changes with their season). Judges, am I and my dear kin wrong to be feeling like this? Or should we hope that our dm has stuff planned for us down the road? I await your wisdom and your divine judgement. (Except for Jake's)

Jane Paintrain

To the Honorable Justices and the worm bailiff, Lowly - I present the case of the Marvel Menace. In the early days of our playgroup one of us wanted to try DMing for the first time with just me running two PCs. The practice session was fun and I agreed to another. What I didn’t know was that the DM invited a second player to the next session. I was nervous because my two characters were parodies of Marvel characters - funny for a one shot but far from what I would typically play in a full campaign. Of course, the new player comes in with Thor and Black Widow and a full campaign ensues. From there things only got worse as the second player created exclusively Marvel characters for all subsequent campaigns, one shots, and mini arcs in our larger play group. These PCs have not been well received at the table as we tend to play typical medieval high-fantasy adventures. Judges, I ask you - who must bear the blame for this superhero epidemic that has been going on six years now? Is it the second player for forcing his superhero fantasy into our forgotten realms, is it the new but overly permissive DM that enabled us, or must I make my way to a Dice Christ confessional and beg forgiveness for this superhero inception? Perhaps everyone is to blame and this case has no heroes after all. I leave the ruling in your capable hands.

AnthoniMM

To the splendors of justices Tanner and Murphy, the highly radical justice Hurpitz, and the splendifirous balif, I bring forth the case of the "multitasking players." But a few weeks ago I was actively dming 5 separate d&d groups, but now I am only dming 4. I have decided to end one groups journey and I am mixed on weather i should have or not. This group was entirely held o er discord. Three players of this group would actively play other games during our sessions. They would play red dead redemption 2, sea of thieves, and even overwatch. They were loud and obnoxious with it as well, and two of them even streamed during one of our session. I asked them to stop playing other games during our sessions. One of them openly scoffed and said they could "multitask". This player never updated their character sheet despite leveling up 3 times over the course of 3 months. These players were new to the game so I'm not sure if i over reacted. The other two players were not interested in the 3 player's shenanigans as well. Justices... should I have just dealt with their games while trying to run this one? I humbly await your decision.

Majoras Milk Bar

To the Alpha Supreme Crit Justices and the beta cuck bailiff jake, I present to you the case of the Solo Climbing Barbarian. Early on in our campaign, the party was travelling through a forest and encountered a tall wooden palisade wall, made from upright logs that had been stripped bare of their bark and branches, which was surrounding a village. The guards at the top of the wall were actively hostile towards the party members, releasing arrows and demanding that they leave. One of the players (who was a first time problem player) antagonised the NPCs further and then said that they wanted to climb the wall to confront them, despite the rest of the party telling him not to. Our DM said that he would have to roll an acrobatics check to climb the wall, but later (after some arguing with the player) reluctantly agreed to give the option of an athletics check with a higher DC — clarifying that because the defensive wall was made of upright beams it would call for agility, momentum and balance more than raw strength. Judges, my issue lies in the fact that not only did this player disagree with the ruling and argue with the entire table before and after his failed roll, but he continued to interrupt the rest of the session reading paragraphs from websites aloud and watching youtube videos of people climbing walls on his phone at a loud volume while shaking his head to himself. It is still brought up to this day, so we have come to you to settle this once and for all. Was the reasoning for the DC checks fair, or should he have been able to do it because “people do it in real life all the time”? We await your verdict, “The Murph of the group”

Peter Brown

I throw myself at the feet of the most blessed scions of Dice Christ. I do not ask for judgement, but rather salvation, and not for myself. My friend...cannot roll well. It is truly tragic to see this lamb of Dice Christ fall at incredibly pivotal and important moments. If it were crits, it would be a sign of Dice Christs displeasure but I've done the math. I trawled through the Roll20 Chat History and compiled a spreadsheet...to show him that no one is ever truly lost in the eyes of the Ever Advantaged...but he's right. If it were crits, it would be something It would be significant But his crit successes and failures are roughly equal with the group (though he did roll 4 Nat 1's in a row which is 1 in 160,000). But his ability to roll a 2-5 is truly staggering. A good 60% of his rolls land in this...nothing zone. A crit fail can be a Moment but constantly failing is really demoralising him. One could argue he begins to sook, and we try to cheer him up, to celebrate failure and make a big deal out of his successes...but he is so very tired. The DM is a first timer, and doing an amazing job, but it's so hard to frame 3 turns in a row of missed attacks as anything but a bummer. What can we do to exult him again in Dice Christ's light? I fear to watch my friends joy of the game leave him and seek your wisdom.

Sean Ellis

OK, so, in a side-quest mini campaign I recently ran, my players were contracted by the spawn of a Beholder to kill it’s father. Long-story short, the players infiltrate the Beholder’s lair, fight the big bad, nearly fail, and in desperation, attempt a polymorph (they’d burned through all legendary resistances) by this point. Of course, my Beholder rolls a nat 2 on the save and the Druid turns it into a lil pot-belly pig. Having previously established that the Beholder’s spawn who hired them could teleport, communicate with them remotely, AND turn living things to stone, the party summoned it and successfully created a stone pig beholder trophy. Shouldn’t these damned monsters be immune to Polymorph? What the shit? Sincerely Yours, -S.M.E

ZoeyHorse (Afterdark)

Hi to the lovely judges and the baylif that reminds me of spike from my little pony (bad thing), I have a dice christ confession Last time I played DND with some of my friends they started shouting at each other and stopped talking to one another based on an in character argument Is this my fault? Lots of love Zoey P.S shout out Uilleam MacDougall

Ellen J

Dear esteemed judges and Jorts the bailiff, I bring to you the case of the abandoned Christmas campaign. As part of my Christmas present, my fiancé created a mini campaign for us to play together. He only started playing D&D last summer but has really got into DMing, while I have been playing in an online campaign on and off for the last few years. The idea came from a conversation we'd had a few weeks earlier about what classes our cats would be if they were D&D characters. (In case you are interested, we settled on: - Our ginger and white cat Ginny who brings us back "presents" from her adventures as a gloomstalker ranger/assassin rogue multiclass. - Our affectionate brown tabby cat Callie (yes, short for Calliope, named for Emily's character in campaign three) as a life cleric. - And our one-eyed calico called Willow who is sadly no longer with us but who loved to spend time in the garden as a circle of stars druid.) As well as the adventure, he created level 8 character sheets for each of them. We played our first session, just the two of us, and had a great time. Then, a few friends of ours expressed an interest in playing D&D. My partner has thrown himself into DMing for this group, with a whole new campaign. We recently had our sixth session and it is going really well BUT this means my cat themed Christmas campaign has completely fallen to the wayside. I ask you Justices: am I right to be a little sad that my fluffy friends never got their chance to save the world or should I just be grateful that my fiancé has chosen to take on the role of forever DM and run this new campaign for me and our friends? Ellen from the UK PS I am not really upset about this and mostly wrote in to brag about how incredible and thoughtful my fiancé is, I can't wait to marry him in September.

James M

May I beg for forgiveness from the jolly justices and bayliff flake, rake, hake! No wait.. bailiff cake! I ask for your most humble of opinions in my plead for mercy as I step onto the alter in the church of dice Christ. Six years ago when I began playing DnD I was but an immature teenager who wanted lord of the rings level battles and awesome character moments. But I was too blind to see that these moments are best kept at a minimum so they feel amazing when they finally happen! My dice always seemed to roll against me and I would get so frustrated with my luck that I would often (maybe too often) lie about my rolls so that I could get the final kill on a bbeg and or the odd innocent chicken. This of course led to my character becoming a true legend, until one day when a player noticed that my dice was a 12 not a 20, they called me out on it at the table and I had to re roll this led to them becoming suspicious everytime I took a final blow, even when I had rolled a Nat 20! I of course am now an adult man in my mid twenties and would never dream of lying about my rolls for my charcters, I have since played a kenku wizard who was dumb as shit for which I welcomed the low rolls for comedy purposes. Please I beg of you forgive me for my innocent teenager mush of a brain, I prostrate myself before the humble court, Kindest regards, Jim

Britt Maynard

To the honorable Crit Justices and mediocre Bailiff Josh, I present to you the red flag DM. I played my second campaign ever with an online DM. He seemed great at first, but when we started, we never clarified if we were playing 2014 or 2024. I spent hours making my 2024 sorcerer and even more hours leveling up from 3 to 6 or 7, choosing my spells and feats and ability scores. Everything I adjusted had a reason and a story. About ten sessions in, he pointed out that I shouldn't have as many spells as I did. I was confused, it was only my second campaign and I didn't know 2014 and 2024 had such big differences. We had already started the session when he noticed the discrepancies. He insisted that we stop the game and I change my character from 2024 to 2014 before we could keep playing. I hate being put on the spot and I begged him to let me just finish this session and that I'd fix it that night immediately after the session. He insisted that even though we had already played ten sessions without big problems, we wouldn't continue until I readjusted my spells, ability scores, and feats. He made me do it on the spot while all the other players just sat on discord waiting for me to change hours of preparation and work and I almost quit on the spot. It was the most uncomfortable I had ever been while playing D&D and I almost quit the campaign completely. I expressed my discomfort and it was ignored. Am I just too sensitive or was that the wrong move from the DM? It's not the only red flag from that DM, but if my case is chosen, I'll happily send an update with the other big red flags from him.

SkipperMars

A confession for a friend. May dicechrist forgive him. For the past several years a cherished fellow of mine has been plagued with a unique curse. I play with longtime friends online over Discord and Roll20 and have for the past 5 years. At the beginning of every session we all roll for recap to have a player recount the last session before the DM gives their account. Practically. Every. Single. Time. it is our cursed friend that rolls lowest and must give recap. Over all these years the rest of us can count on one hand how many times we’ve had to do it. Statistics holds no solace for my friend so I hope that dicechrist can.

SomeBaldNomad

Oh beautiful and honorable Justices Murphy, Axford, and Tanner, and of course, Bailiff Jake… may it please the court. I present the case of The Unknowingly Punished Player. I play in a 6-player campaign that been going for years, one night after a session, I was gaming with our party’s Warlock when—unprompted—he started telling me spoilers about his next arc and the campaign. For context; We recently found out his patron is secretly the BBEG. Well he told me they'd planned a new patron for him that is a major character. So I messaged my best friend (also a player, and dating the DM) for advice. He told the DM… and then came the punishment. Next session, the BBEG appeared and stripped the Warlock of all his warlock levels, leaving him with just 3 levels in his secondary class. The party was level 11—and has since leveled up again. His left arm, which bore his pact tattoos, was also taken when his pact was broken. I also think the DM has abandoned the storyline they were planning altogether. I'm pretty sure the Warlock doesn’t know. It has been about 7 sessions. He got 1 Warlock level back briefly for a fight recently but it was revoked again after the encounter. He’s still showing up and enjoying the roleplay, but i can't help but think he's been punished enough. So justices, was this a fair sentence? Has he suffered enough? Or should he remain a budget PC? Side note: everyone at the table listens to NADDPOD, except the Warlock. So he has no idea the effect these proceedings might have.

Andrew Whitford

Dear Supreme Crit Justices and Bailey, I bring to you the case of the polymorph punt. A few years ago, I was in a game where my party was facing off against two frost giants. Our bard cast polymorph on one, turning it into a rat, so that we could focus fire on the other. Once that frost giant was slain, all that was left was this little rat, who had started nipping at the spellcasters that were keeping their distance from the melee. My character was a sorcerer who certainly would not want to be near the giant when it turned back, so when my turn came I did what anyone would do in this situation - I narrate myself punting the rat back towards the melee characters. Instead of the rat soaring away from me, my DM narrates that the rat immediately turned back into a giant as soon as I touched it, and the giant plops down right in front of me. I argued that to kill the rat I would need to have pushed it enough to break its bones, causing it to start flying away prior to it turning back into a giant. My dm wouldn’t budge and kept his giant right next to me. Ultimately I fucked off with misty step and we easily won the battle but I ask you, was my cool move nerfed or was the DM right to keep the giant right where he was? I humbly await your judgement.

Cas

dear bodacious judges and bailiff jonk. i present the case of the inaccurate arrow slit. We had to infiltrate a base. There was a tall tower, 8 stories tall, with an arrow slit on each side every level. The party couldn’t to sneak through the shadow because of kobolds that can only see the party if they are in the shadow, and the light is the safe haven as a result. The party decided to take a long rest and woke to see the shadow now covers the door. They needed another way in. Our party's paladin argued that our druid could wildshape into a seagull and feasibly fit through one of the arrow slits. The DM ruled against this, claiming the slit wasn't large enough. The paladin argued with the DM's description, saying that "It's not accurate." He then proceeded to pull out his phone and look up the average size of arrow slits. They bickered back and forth for a solid 10 minutes and the paladin got increasingly more agressive. He eventually ended the conversation and left to go to "the bathroom" which was actually just him stewing in his car alone for 20 minutes in silence. The next day, he proceeded to text the DM that he didn't want to play anymore and was quitting the campaign. Judges, was it fair of the paladin to call the DM out on inaccurate information or was the paladin overreacting? P.S. He didn't actually end up quitting.

Sam F

Not a case but I forgot to ask this at the last Q&A. Since you folks are doing shorter campaigns currently and Emily created that amazing "ballad of a green knight" song have you thought about doing a campaign of all green knights. Wherever in the time line and maybe an oops all paladin thing could be cool.

Carl S.

May it please the court. I present the case of the Skipped Side Quests. Our party was nearing the climax of the campaign, hunting down the BBEG: an ancient, memory-eating vampire. To reach his lair, we had to traverse a haunted forest. As we ventured deeper, our party found a small stone altar tangled in thick roots. Our DM described eerie whispers rising from it, calling our names and offering each of us a secret in exchange for a magical item. We chose to ignore it and kept walking. Not long after, we spotted a few robed, faceless figures in the distance, seated silently around the charred remains of a campfire. Once again, we kept walking. At this point, our DM audibly signed, but moved us along. We reached the manor and charged in. The battle was swift and brutal: four rounds, total party kill. Stunned, we asked our DM what had gone wrong. Our DM informed us, calmly, that we had skipped two side quests designed to level us up. Then, the following week, he admitted that in a moment of spite, he’d added two extra henchmen to the final fight because we “speedran his cool forest.” So I ask you, honorable Justices: Was our DM right to whomp us for ignoring his carefully crafted optional content? I humbly await your ruling.

Beluga, Gunks undersea mount that only drinks dr.p

Oh eloquent justices and scruffy bailiff Jim, I present you the case of the break-up explosion. This happened a while ago, but I still wish to find justice. I was in a campaign with 4 friends of 3 years. One player got a girlfriend and she joined the campaign. She was a very nice player and enjoyed playing with us, until we reached the bbeg. The bbeg of our campaign was a cosmic black-hole like god trying to consume everything for power. The fight was exiting and fun until the girlfriend was knocked out. The bbeg was nearing defeat, and it was the boyfriend’s turn. The girlfriend asked to be brought up to finish the fight, but the boyfriend wanted to end the fight before it was the bbeg’s turn. He attacked the boss and finished the fight, but the dm narrated how the bbeg exploded with brilliant light, for one last attack. The dm rolled to see if the players got hit, and justices, he crit on the girlfriend. He did 44 damage and killed the girlfriend’s pc. She stood up, stared at the boyfriend and said, “I hate this game! I hate you!” And stormed out. Next session, she did not come back. Justices, who is at fault here? Who needs to be punished? I await your judgement.

Katrina Dagenais

To the juicy judges and briny baliff: This is a case from my first campaign and years later I still think about it. My thief rogue was struggling in combat without magical weapons, so I was excited when the DM planted the location of a legendary rogue’s guild where maybe we would find some items for me. When we got there, an entire item set (I later learned was from a video game) was just sitting there, not trapped or hidden at all. There was also a pedestal that gave knowledge equivalent to the amount of treasure offered to it. Since the treasure was just disappearing to somewhere, and it all felt too easy, I told the party to put my halfling rogue on the pedestal so I could see where it went. Maybe this was the guild that could train me! Judges, I was taken and ended up in an empty room, and my party had to pay everything they had to get me returned WITHOUT any of my gear, including the new items! I thought I was trying something creative and interesting, but feel I was punished for it. Soon after, the DM gave me a weapon designed to cast greater invisibility on me and then make me go unconscious, to kill off my character. I ask you judges, did I swing too big, or was I wronged?

Andrew Sexton

To the very honorable Supreme Crit Justices and the dopealicous bailiff I submit the case of the government building disaster scenario. I was running a campaign with my friends and I told them at the beginning that their actions would have consequences. We usually ran a carefree and consequence free campaign, but I wanted to try something different. When we first started they usual shenanigans happened with slight repercussions that everyone had fun with. The antics however escalated quickly and before I knew they committed multiple crimes one of which absolutely cleaning out a chucky cheese. I finally slapped down a hard punishment that they were captured of a laundry list of crimes and were held in the most secure government building in the world as a council decided their fate. One of my players decided that they did not want to wait and ask to pick the lock to their room and break out. We were getting close to the time we agreed to be done and I knew that this would run too long if they attempted a break out. I simply told him there is no way he would be able to break out of this building due to how secure it is, he demanded that he should be able to try so I told him to go ahead and it was a dc 25 slight of hand check to open this door without the guards outside to notice. He got frustrated and said I was steering. I then introduced a npc on the counsel that had taken a liking to them and said they would be okay if they participated in a wwe hell in a cell style cage match. They all agreed and had fun but when the session was over the one party member still brought up he would have liked to try and escape the building. Was I wrong to not let him attempt to break out and was I steering? I lay my fate upon the upmost respectable supreme crit justices.

Roo

I can relate to the poor rolls. When I was young I played 40k (2nd edition) and I routinely rolled so badly the running joke was that I needed to start a remedial dice rolling school so that I could then attend it.

Sebastian Brecht

To the beloved, nay, adored justices of the supreme crit. And to the Bailiff who shouts his curdled opinions from the basement. I play with multiple groups of incredibly lovely and praiseworthy friends. They take careful notes and make my dice towers shake with the laughter they bring. The only constant between these groups is a close friend of mine, my only rival in dnd knowledge and experience. But throughout my years playing with him, ive noticed he sometimes makes a habit of pinching the dice as soon as it comes to a stop, thus obscuring the outcome from view whether im behind the screen or sitting next to him. I am wary to trust the whoops of joy he gives on these occasions, and it is shaking my view of the narrative and the honesty of the game. Judges, what do I do, what do I say, and how can our bond strengthen throughout this? I clench my dice filled fist in anticipation.

Payt Suro

Greetings Judges and Jork! I bring forth the case of the little sister and the Hut. I was running a halloween one-shot for some friends and wanted to get my sister (22 years old) to play with us too. She said she wanted to play, but would only do so if she could play as Baba Yaga's Hut. This is a tiny cottage from russian folklore that stands about 20 feet in the air, sits on top of two huge, tall chicken legs, and can walk of its own accord around the woods. I asked if she wanted to play as Baba Yaga (the witch who owns the hut) instead, and she said no. I asked if she would like to play as a magical chicken with some kind of Leomond's tiny hut feature instead, and she said no. She chose to play as a 10×10x 30ft tall shed with no ability to talk, no eyes, and no arms. She had a "Thwomp" attack where she could sit on people and decimate them (while also taking some structural damage herself), and she had a projectile attack where she could launch random Witch items out of the house at enemies. (hot skewer, healing potion, enchanted chamber pot). The house was magically sealed so no one could enter it. Overall things went fine, but this was really hard to plan for! The thing is my sister wants to do something like this every single time I try to get her to play, and just isn't interested in the games if I try and direct her to something normal. Judges I ask that you use the power of the Dungeon Court to give her parole or community service or something with the stipulation that she has to try to play something withing the rulebook. I didn't want to have to use the power or law in this way but I'm running out of options and I think she could have just as much fun as a rogue or a druid as she can as a house.

Dingdongdang55

To the great bailiff Jake, the casual justice ca-ca-callldwelll, ryan urphy, and the elegant justice axford, I was starting a campaign with strangers and played a gladiator (kel thor) and our level 3 party faced off against a coven of hags first session. I was the only person downed during the fight and before facing her death, one hag stabbed my PC, killing Kel. I was revived but later i was brainwashed into a cult, losing Kel. Then losing a second PC. And later ended up losing my third character in a TPK. (us 4, level 8s against 3 ropers). After this i ended quitting this campaign as this was my third PC death in 3 months in a very, DM vs Players feeling campaign and kel thor just wanted to see the world with his goat buddy he stole from a giant. I ask you Justices. Was I wronged in having my PCs killed 3 times in 3 months? Ps i did make a lifelong friend from this game and she got me hooked on NADDPOD. Shoutout Carlyn! Pss will send cat pics if you choose my side

Nick Powell

To the illustrious judges and the illuminating ballif, I DM for a group of 4 of my buddies, and have been playing mostly monthly for almost 2 years. We are all extremely young (37+) dads. The party has been having a lot of fun for the most part. The human cleric searching for a lost god, the drow rogue searching for a lost half-sister who turned out to be the main bad guy of the first arc (classic!), and the warforged artificer looking for answers to his creation and why he has no memories. Then there's the 4th player. Let me start by saying I began this campaign by asking everyone to focus on making heroic characters, since some of the players were new to dnd and having a party with inherent incentive to do good would lead to more adventure and yes-anding my quest givers. The 4th player is a chaotic evil (his words) shapeshifter sorcerer who's backstory boils down to "Asmodeus tells me to kill people and I do it". I state again, we are 37+. Every encounter begins with the shapeshifter shifting into one of the humanoid bad guys, stripping one of the bad guys naked so he can wear their clothes, and trying to use telepathy to convince the bad guys that he's their god and they should do his bidding. This has not worked once. I've tried telling the player that I would have preferred them to make a more heroic character, I've tried to explain that I'm not going to give his character plot hooks that lean into the whole Asmodeus making him murder people thing, and I've tried to give him explicit outs in the story to be a better guy and have a change of heart. My next encounter for our July session is likely to include 0 humanoids so he can't shift into one of them, and I'm likely to focus him down to kill him. Am I correct in doing so, or should I recieve whatever silly punishment Caldwell is focused on this week? I am at your mercy. Nick

Jackson Hurley

To the Dry Pants'd Justices and the Piss Boy Bailiff I present the case of the insecure DM My two rotating DM's have just had a baby together! (Soon after finishing a 5 year campaign) and are retiring for the foreseeable future - because of this I've been wanting to offer to take over for our group The only problem is I've DM'd sporadically before and it has often fizzled out due to inconsistent scheduling but I want to do something nice for my friends so we can all keep having fun together without the added stress on the new parents. Should I dwell on the past forever or start fresh and see if I can do better this time? P.S hate the show

Andi

Honored Crit Justices & Crit Justice Adjacents, I bring to you today a case of Minority Report DMing I'm a PC in my campaign, but I'll be a surprise guest DM for my party in an upcoming session. I've been a long time consumer of D&D content, & played in a few campaigns over the years, but this will be my 1st time in the DM seat. I'm excited to create a story for my friends to play with, but also worry that I'm making mechanics too convoluted or not paying attention enough to things like challenge rating. What are some pre-session actions I can take to prevent my players from filing future court cases against me?

NowWhatComix

That’s so real Roll20 will just decide to say fuck you in particular to some people, myself among them

Kyle M

Hello spry justices and the sluggish bailiff Jake. I bring to you the case of the spotlight-stealing slug. I’m a first-time dm running a campaign for a group of my friends - in the second session of the campaign, one of the players, the Druid, unexpectedly had to leave the province for a few months, so I wrote in that they struggled to unwildshape from the giant slug form they had assumed, and would trail behind the party until they returned. When they did return, the party was raiding a castle, except this player, instead of collaborating with the others to make a plan, would instead split from the party to do their own plan separately to solve the problem. On one such attempt they made a deal with a hag and got locked in a prison. I resolved how that went, and then jumped over to my other players. Eventually, the Druid said “and then we’ll jump to me”, to which I said “let me resolve what happens with the others”, to which they responded “I’ve been waiting … so …”. I conceded and jumped to them, and I’ll admit because the Druid was alone and there were 5 members in the party I was allocating 3x to 4x time to the party, which I know could be unfun for the Druid who has to sit quietly. Judges, should I have let the Druid narrate their jailbreak quicker, or does this slug need to slow down. I humbly await your judgement.

Jamjam

If it may please the court, the hardworking justices and the hardly working bailiff, I present: The case of the questionable character choices A few years ago I played DnD for the second time in my life within a university game analysis course. I was excited, I baked cookies for the table and sat down for a oneshot where we all played premade characters (I was a gnome rogue, there was a human paladin, a halforc barbarian and a halfelf ranger) and it was fun until i noticed the halfelf ranger was using slurs when talking about other races, calling me a footscraper and later a female dwarf something i’d translate to “beard slut”. That second one made me really uncomfortable and when I said so, he pointed at his character sheet that stated the ranger doesn’t trust/like other races and said he was just roleplaying. i dropped it and the dm moved on, but it still felt weird. the only other girl at the table later also said to me that she felt it was crossing a line and thanked me for mentioning it, but both of us didn’t really play rpgs back then, so I wondered: Had I been in the wrong for objecting to the way this player chose to play his character? Was casual sexism just something I’d have to deal with when playing dnd? I have since then played more with other people but I still feel weird about this incident. I bow to the court, hoping for mercy. PS: The guy playing the halfelf ranger was the professor.

Another Sam

I would like to thank my puppy for having to go to the bathroom at 4:30 in the morning, allowing me to be in court today to present the case of the Edgelord. (I think Jake was trying to stack the cases with East coast elites, so judges, punish him how you will) I DM'd a campaign for people I went to high school with (about 8 years after we all graduated). One of them was playing an Edgelord rogue whose character had the background and personality you'd expect. Three sessions in I had an NPC from his past approach him, using the character's real name. The player stopped participating in the session, and at one point got up to the dishes. I was trying to take the hood off the rogue, but perhaps I did it too soon, and should have given him the chance to reveal his back story in his own time?

Shane C

No case to share just saying congrats on being demoted

Nellie

I implore the attention of the honourable judges and the newly demoted bailiff. I offer the case of bystander Goku! I found an amazing D&D group last year through my college. We were all put together randomly by a Games society, but miraculously all got along incredibly well. This included being fine with bits in our games. We learned pretty quickly that the DM would "yes and," just about anything. I like to think I personally didn't abuse this power too much, but another player (a sorcerer) wound up bringing Goku from Dragon Ball Z into canon. I have never seen Dragon Ball Z and didn't even really clock the Goku bit until the sorcerer was referring to Goku as his uncle/family friend. The sorcerer had used sending to communicate with his mother and had asked her to bring Goku when she came to visit. I didn't think any of this would come to fruition in the game itself, but during the final two sessions which took place during a masquerade ball, the sorcerer's mother showed up, and with her was Goku. Real Goku. When the party descended into battle against the BBEG, the sorcerer and various other party members kept calling for Goku to come fight with us. Goku would only nod and stand there with his arms folded, even on a high persuasion check. Several of us agreed that he was "powering up," and would come to help us eventually. He never did. We won the fight without him but it was extremely close. To be clear, we all thought this was hilarious, but we still talk about Goku's presence in the fight and whether or not he should have done something. Judges, I ask of you, should Goku have done literally anything in the fight or was the DM in her right to just have him stand there?

James M

May I beg for forgiveness from the jolly justices and bayliff flake, rake, hake! No wait.. bailiff cake! I ask for your most humble of opinions in my plead for mercy as I step onto the alter in the church of dice Christ. Six years ago when I began playing DnD I was but an immature teenager who wanted lord of the rings level battles and awesome character moments. But I was too blind to see that these moments are best kept at a minimum so they feel amazing when they finally happen! My dice always seemed to roll against me and I would get so frustrated with my luck that I would often (maybe too often) lie about my rolls so that I could get the final kill on a bbeg and or the odd innocent chicken. This of course led to my character becoming a true legend, until one day when a player noticed that my dice was a 12 not a 20, they called me out on it at the table and I had to re roll this led to them becoming suspicious everytime I took a final blow, even when I had rolled a Nat 20! I of course am now an adult man in my mid twenties and would never dream of lying about my rolls for my charcters, I have since played a kenku wizard who was dumb as shit for which I welcomed the low rolls for comedy purposes. Please I beg of you forgive me for my innocent teenager mush of a brain, I prostrate myself before the humble court, Kindest regards, Jim

Marcus D'Agostino

Dear crit justice and the bailiff amir, I present the case of the too silly voices In my home game of 5 players, we recently started a new campaign. one fighter PC has been doing a voice so deep and gravely its almost impossible to understand him (think zudrick with a lot of sinus congestion). when we (the PC’s) have mentioned that this voice can be tricky to understand, he just says it enhances his roleplaying and immersion. the situation escalated when another PC died, rolled a new character, and began doing their own silly voice, this one a high pitched tiefling. now my table has become a cacophany of voices i can hardly follow. I brought this up to the DM, who said “It’s no big deal, I just don’t really listen when those PC’s talk” Justices, am I wrong for wanting to understand the other PC’s voices? or am i being a grinch for not committing harder to the “roleplay and immersion”?

NowWhatComix

Dude you gotta hand that guy a PHB. Tieflings aren’t infernal they’re Druids??? What???

Matt Miner

To the most honorable justices of the supreme crit and some jag named Jake who is also here, I present to you the case of the bards who were afraid to detect magic. A few years ago I was in a 1st edition pathfinder campaign where myself and one other party member were both playing bards when we had a few encounters in quick succession which caused us to quietly ban the spell Detect Magic behind our DM's back. It started when we were investigating a series of kidnappings happening throughout the city. We laid a trap and figured out that who or whatever was taking the children was somewhere in an alley with us and was invisible. Without any better options in my spellbook, I opted to cast Detect Magic because if you concentrate on it for three rounds you can see the "strength and location" of each magical aura within a 60 foot cone. My hope wasn't so much to literally see the person/monster, but to at least be able to track it back to its lair via any magical auras/items it had on its body; however, it caused the entire encounter to grind to a hault. My DM got really caught up in how Detect Magic works (it's admittedly kind of weird in pathfinder) and took a good 45 minutes of rereading the spell and looking things up before finally deciding that the spell wouldn't work the way I wanted it to, which is perfectly fine. However, a few sessions later, while looking for traps in our hideout the other bard cast Detect Magic and it led to a full two and a half hours break in gameplay. Unbeknownst to us there was a devil's contract tucked away under some files in the area he was searching and my DM wasn't sure if it would have a magical aura or not. His solution to resolving this was to post on an FAQ message board and wait in real time for people to respond, leading to two and a half hours of all of us sitting around a table begging for him to just make a judgement call while our cleric fell asleep on the couch. After this session I pulled the other bard aside and we both agreed that it was best for everybody involved that we just don't cast that spell anymore, to the point that when my DM said to me once "If you cast Detect Magic you'll be able to tell there's no traps here" and I responded with "No I'm okay". So my question is this, were me and the other bard wrong for banning our own spell behind the DM's back or was it the best way to ensure that sessions didn't come grinding to a hault over a cantrip? I await your quick and decisive judgement venerable justices and also Jake.

Spenser Willden

High crit. Esteemed bailiff and court, plus I suppose clerk Snake Jerkwitz. Picture this: you’re me. Silly little pathfinder dwarven gunslinger, emeric cragshot. you know you’re going to a shady part of town full of pickpockets, so you leave all of your wealth at your uncle’s house except for one bag of copper worth 1 gold piece (100 copper), for the purposes of bluffing that you have more money than you have. You get to the place, and make clear you’re keeping an eye out for anyone trying to pick your pocket. The DM does not ask you to roll perception (for which you have a high ass score). You give the bag full of copper to someone, a wily boy thief, as a bribe, get your information, then leave arm-in-arm with your party mates. The DM then narrates how you feel your belt and notice that you’ve personally lost ALL your gold. he secretly rolled sleight of hand and perception for the kid you bribed and for your character to see if the kid could steal from you without your noticing. You remind the DM you had nothing on you but the money you actually GAVE the kid, as you hid the rest at home, but your DM just shakes his head no. He says that he rolled so high on his sleight of hand that he “didn’t want to waste it,” and because the roll he did for my perception was low, and nobody else chose to roll perception, he picked me to lose all my hard-earned smackers: meaning that my earlier move must not have happened, or that somehow I didn’t notice having brought all my money with me after explicitly leaving it behind. The total amount of gold I had to begin with wasn’t high, and I am already on my way out this campaign due to time stuff, so this isn’t the biggest deal. But the negating of my (I thought fairly prudent) move of hiding my gold at home, combined with this all being “behind the screen secret checks” (pathfinder baloney) and having not gotten to roll the dice myself more than a single time in the preceding three hours miffed me. High crit, I ask you this: what the hell?

frogwithhumanhands

To the sword-wielding justices and the lowly Jar-jar Binksliff, I present to you the case of the hot uncle. I've been DMing this game for the past year. During our session 0, we all agreed that we weren't interested in role playing any romance or anything and while we've generally stuck to that rule, our bard, Azel, is flirty and they will occasionally throw a little wink or suggestive remark at my NPCs, which has been both fine and funny. Our wizard, Morala, has an uncle named Altair that the party recently met, and everyone took an immediate liking to him. However, in our game, Azel finds Morala almost insufferably annoying (the players are good friends and we all laugh when they roleplay this) and Azel has recently started saying "Don't make me fuck your uncle" to Morala when she's being difficult. So far, we all think this is hilarious, but I also know that Morala's player can be oddly defensive over their fictional family and, while I would stop it if it progressed beyond jokes, I also just kind of leaned into playing Altair as an oblivious himbo who didn't notice when he was being flirted with. This made the other players want to fuck him too. So judges, what do I do? Should I stop making my NPCs so hot? Should they just stop wanting to fuck Morala's uncle? I await your swift and fair judgement.

Jamjam

If it may please the fairest court and fairly ok bailiff, I have a case, a grievance, a dilemma: I play a kitsune witch in a very fun pathfinder campaign with my friends, a fighter catfolk, a dwarf alchemist and a sprite kineticist. we are establishing a kingdom to rule and it’s chaotic and corgi-themed. We are level 4, and have played for about a year. RP is fun and combat very cinematic, we have a great GM! the issue in question: In the past 2 sessions, my character has always died in the first round of combat, and nobody revived me, though we all have healing potions and there was a healer NPC with us. The last time we were fighting a werewolf. After failing my initial attack roll, I chose to stay by the fighter instead of retreating, so he wouldn’t be the only one taking attacks and wouldn’t fully die. the rest of the party was out of range. Even though I was at full hp, the werewolf downed me in two swipes, which allowed for the fighter to survive another round, in which he attacked twice and then took a healing potion for himself. After the rest of the party caught up, our npc healer then used his only offensive spell to attack the werewolf (he rolled a nat 1 btw). I gotta say, that hurt a bit. in 3 rounds of combat, aka 1.5h, all I could do was lie there and bleed out. I even rolled a nat 20 on my death save but in pathfinder that just stabilizes you and keeps you unconscious. We won and our alchemist might be a werewolf now (this’ll be fun), but I was a bit bummed for the rest of the session. Judges, was I wrong to be a bit bummed? I will comment with some more context if needed, otherwise I bow to your wisdom!

Jamjam

Some context: This isn’t the first time this happened and I don’t think it’ll be the last. I have the lowest ac and hp of the group, but if we leave our fighter alone in melee range, he has a huge disadvantage, as flanking and positioning is important in pf. I can’t wear armor or “multiclass” to get more hp, so my friends have suggested I become more of a support caster and buff the fighter, but I would have to swap my entire spell list for that and completely change my character. And cause I keep dying in one hit, any buff spells I do have and use are usually useless. beyond that, they said I should carry potions, which I do but obviously this doesn’t help me if I’m dead.

Ash Pope

Hello judges and balif jake! I play in a game that overall revolves around another player's (Sabrina) pc which is a problem in itslef but not the reason i'm writing in. We are about to spend our second session watching her take an "exam" where she fights and answers lore questions (none of which have been mentioned before). She can take it until she passes, and once she does there are several NPCs ready to give her legendary magic items, and she gets two feats she designed herself. Meanwhile the rest of us have never had/ever will have similar opportunities. Are me and my fellow players right to be upset about this imbalance of story and mechanical advantages? Thank you for your consideration!

Baron Trousers

To the Celestial Crit Court who rule on high, and the impish bailiff Ache who wallows below, I bring to you the case of the tramp-stamp disintegration. Some time ago, my gnomish paladin was marked with a transmutation sigil and given the power to cast Disintegrate using Intelligence. Which is rarely successful for my hot, dumb gnome. In our last battle our DM unveiled a cool new mini of a recurring villians's true form - a twin headed, extraplanar, crow-folk. We wamped the baddies and the villain prepared to escape. On my turn I politely asked my DM to make a dex save. I did not declare what spell I was casting. Despite rolling with advantage and only needing a 12, the DM failed the save. The damage exceeded the crow-folk’s current HP by 2 points. The DM asked how I would like to finish the villain. I described my hot gnome pulling up his shirt, revealing that the transmutation sigil looked like a tramp-stamp. The disintegration ray shot out of the tattoo and obliterated the crow-creature. My DM seems despondent that his recurring villain had been killed so cartoonishly. He explained that he had designed and printed the mini specially and planned to use it more than once. He also mentioned the villain had counterspell, but didn’t feel right using it after I’d rolled the damage. I can’t help but feel if I had announced which spell I was using up-front the cool crow-beast would have countered and flown the coop. Was my delayed Disintegrate declaration ok? Or was this tramp-stamped tirade totally trashy?

Alyssa

To the glorious Emily and the other dudes too. Here's a case of the monkey wrench. My d&d party has consisted of my best friend from college, his eldest brother, and some of his other friends. While his other friends are very cool and nice, we have nicknamed the brother, Bryan, two monkey wrenches. Because dm'ing for him, you have to be ready for him to throw not one but two monkey wrenches in whatever plans you have for the campaign. Knowing this, I dm'ed my first one shot. A feywild carnival where the adventurers had to solve why the ring leader had suddenly become like someone else. I styled my game after Jasper William Cartright's carnival on RHP, and had a bunch of games they could play and NPC's to talk to. The fortune teller of the carnival let you pick deck of many things cards. Everyone picked cards and Bryan somehow got a wish and only good cards from the deck. When it came to fight the ringleader, he used one of his wishes to "send the ringleader to another plane". Now here's the good part, I set up the ring leader to be a possessed human, taken over by a demon which is why he had a change of heart. I asked him multiple times, "are you sure that's how you're wording your wish?" He said yes, and the ring leader disappeared and the demon was left in his place and the party had to fight him but they were no match. Bryan feels like I did the group dirty by not sending the demon along with the ring leader. Oh glorious Emily and those dudes too, did I try too hard to counter act the monkey wrench man or was I okay in taking the wish he wished as literally as he described it?

el_mathemagician

To the benevolent Justices and that guy who lives in the trash can, I think his name is Joscar, I present to you the case of the sleeping dwarf. I was in my very first campaign playing as a dwarven paladin. In one of our sessions, we were in a dungeon crawl and the warlock in our party had found a potion. She drank some and it had healed her. Our DM had told us there was enough for someone else to drink as well and since I needed some health, I took a drink. However, when I drank it, I ended up falling unconscious. My party tried to wake my character up using several checks, spells and potions but my DM said there was no way. The session ended with me being unconscious. At our next session, I was still out as my party continued to fight monsters, find treasure, and trek through the dungeon. I thought I might get a dream sequence or some sort of vision for the session, but no, I literally did not get to do a single thing the entire session! Not only that, this entire dungeon lasted another 2 sessions, which meant that I had 3 sessions where I did not get to do a single thing the entire time. I would argue with my DM that this mechanic doesn’t make sense and I would try and ask if there was anything I could do to come out of consciousness, but he always just said that was his ruling. I almost pulled a Murph and thought about just quitting and getting a new group, but my character was finally awake after we escaped the dungeon. Justices, was my DM wrong for putting my character to sleep for 3 sessions with nothing to do, or am I overreacting. I humbly await your judgment. PS: My DM is a good friend of mine and this seemed like an isolated incident as the rest of the campaign was really fun.

MegaBee

To the benevolent representatives of the highest court, and Jank, I come today to seek not justice but insight. I joined a text-message based campaign a few months after the rest of the group had started. Originally the pitch was a low-pressure gameplay vibe where everyone could be involved at their own speed, whenever they have time, and worrying about scheduling could be avoided. It turns out that the DM and I get carried away with character role-playing and story beats, and end up running full scenes together before the rest of the group has a chance to participate. This leaves them all playing catch-up and stressing that promised chill vibe. If we hold off to give the others time, it's hard not to seem impatient - often we are. I feel like that's not fair to the group but also neither of us wants to lose the collaborative momentum; for me, at least, it's what i like most. Everyone's been really good about above-table checking in and our communication is solid, but occasionally frustration bubbles up and we take a break to figure out if we're going to continue. So far, we always vote yes, but the issue keeps happening because the equation is still unbalanced. Is there a way out of this cycle that I'm not seeing? I await humbly the wisdom of the court and Jank.

Aiden Swartz

Felicitous salutations to the Supreme Crit Justices Axford, Murphy, and Tanner. And a hardy hello to the guy who works at birdlesque. I bring to you the case of the time travelling DM. Me and my friends play D&D infrequently due to the fact we are in medical school. We recently completed a major arc that ended with us beating a team of electro-boogaloo pirates, freeing a royal ship and its crew and returning it to the king. When we went to play next sessions our DM had no recollection of this happening and no notes. He insisted that we play the whole capturing of the boat again. After a while of us trying to convince him that we did this he relented and said “ok, I forgot we played this part, but I’ve added information so let’s replay” what ensued was an entire re-do of our last session, where the only thing that changed was the addition of a joke about the song Karma Chameleon. Needless to say the players were a bit upset at the fact that our last session before exams was an entire repeat that resulted in the same ending (except for Karma Chameleon). Is my DM in the wrong for having had us replay a session we already did? Or should we all have just gone along and been happy with the addition of the Karma Chameleon joke? We await your benevolent decision.

Denatonia (Haven)

Esteemed lords and lady, I present the case of the Forbidden Horse! A few sessions ago, our classical 5e campaign had a big mid-season finale fight. We had just reached lvl5, and as we approached the BBEG, my beloved paladin Esther cast "Find Steed" for the first time to help her in battle. Citing that he "didn't want to deal with an extra thing on the map", the DM randomly forbade this (Note: his gf plays a druid in another campaign and frequently wildshapes/summons, and my ranger is also perfectly fine to fight with her dog, so this had no precedent. HIS paladin also recently summoned himself a steed). He said I should have discussed it with him first if I wanted to use Find Steed (a normal and common paladin spell). He's experienced and it wasn't a 'you'll be too powerful' panic moment. Am I right to be salty about this random decision? I also wouldn't ask if my cleric / wizard are allowed to have Cure Wounds / Magic Missile before I use them! PS: Esther died in the fight, Idk if a steed would have saved her but it definitely would have helped. The party knows of one resurrection scroll and are planning to one day bring her back. Except after I'd made my interim bard with an exciting but time-limited story arc, the DM suddenly decided that being resurrected would lead to Esther becoming an NPC and leaving the party (I do not want this, she would not, and I was not asked; I was excited to play out my first ever resurrection!). Normally this DM is chill. Esther was well-liked, the sort of leader of the party but not a showstealer, not a problem character whatsoever and smack in the middle of her arc. Wth?

jerpent the serpent

To the most trustworthy and respectable Bailiff (as long as its Jake) and the TREACHEROUS rapscallion judges (unless Jake is a Judge in which I recant my words). I bring you the case of the secret rolls. I play Pathfinder 2E and have been with the same group since I started in 1st edition in 2012. 2nd edition introduced a rule that I think is completely bonkers, but my DM is adamant at following. For several skill checks like stealth and deception the rules as written state that the DM rolls in your place and you don't get to know the result, just whether you pass or fail. My DM is very adamant about maintaining this system, however I feel it removes the excitement of rolling a natural 20 or 1. While the game continues to be a successful and fun this is a point that my DM and I have continually clashed on. Judges, should we forego this rule as written in favor of seeing number go big (or comically small?) or am I doomed to have my rolls made for me? P.S. For rules edification I have linked the relevant information below: https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=2139&Redirected=1.

Jamjam

Hey just jumping in to say that it kinda sounds like your sister might vibe better with a different rpg system that allows more out of the box sort of characters. Maybe check out some alternatives online. I’m not super well-versed in rpg systems, so I don’t know one off the top of my head but I’m sure there are great options out there

Patrick B

To the unstoppable justices and the easily movable baliff: I don’t have a case I just wanted to write an intro.

Patrick

Crit court confessional- Forgive me, dungeon daddies and mamas, for I have sinned. In 2019, my freshman year of college, I played my first ever DnD campaign. I was an absolute menace of a bard, not casting spells except for in roleplay, and would frequently do “lol random” gags like peeing in a library then burning it down. Our DM transferred colleges after that year, and I ended up taking up the mantle of DM for that group, and several more groups in years to come. I’ve since apologized to that DM for behaving that way as I see what it’s like on the other side of the screen, but it still weights on me. I’m on my fourth full campaign I’m running now. I will bear whatever punishment the council deems necessary. Signed, Formerly Ren the Bard

D Cord

To the Honorable Crit Justices and the baby cake boy bailiff I submit the case of the tactical drop horse: In a game with some of my closest friends, I play an aarakocra paladin, please Justice Murphy, resist eye rolling for just a moment. In a recent session, our group stumbled upon a small camp of the invading army in the forest we were in. The group decided to approach as friends, but to have me fly over invisible, and wait at the other side of the camp in case things turned sour, just to draw attention of the enemies in two directions. I doffed my armor and we loaded my plate mail onto the horse we domesticated at the top of the session (I named her Buttermilk.) I flew over and found a place on the opposite side of camp to hide while the rest of the group initiated conversation with the camp. The plan was if things turned south the ranger would send Buttermilk through the camp to me, where I would then grab my armor and don same with the special Don/doff armor I have. When things inevitably heated up, the ranger rolled a 22 animal handling check to send Buttermilk to me. The DM said in no uncertain terms: absolutely not. It ended up being fine, we got through the combat mostly unscathed but I humbly ask the court: should we have been able to use Buttermilk as a tactical horse care pack

Gunner P

May it pleasure the court, and pander to the honorable judges and of course Murph the most respectable patron of the wrestling fandom. I bring you the case of the "ACCIDENTAL" Cursed blood drinking sword meta build. I Co-DM with my wife primarily because of our 5 month old son taking too much attention for one person to properly handle all the duties that come with the job.. anyways my wife as DM early on in our campaign gave my PC the periapt of wound closure, no big deal right? Well after several close calls but never any real need for the item i left it attuned and simply forgot about it. Fast forward 6 months worth of sessions and a newborn child later, my character was mistakenly Soul-Bound to a Vampiric sword my wife and I had built together. It has an obnoxious sentience of its own, ironically sounding like a bloodthirsty Shank, which gives my max DEX rogue disadvantage on stealth checks, which is great flavor and i love it so no problems there. But the issue lies in the sword has the ability to cast Vampiric Touch with the Cost of a DC 15 CON save to not gain a +1 to Death Saves and Crit Fails on Death saves for every use that isnt passing the CON save. This rule has worked fine until a recent battle had my PC downed making death saves. I was promptly reminded about the Periapt of Wound Closure which then raised my dilemma... If my character is immediately stabilized upon going unconcious. This amulet has my PC sitting up like the Undertaker making Booker T piss himself Have we accidentally meta build my PC by making death saves being the penalty for my cursed sword? And should i just hand off the Amulet to a companion NPC in order to remedy the situation also providing plot-armor for said NPC I feel guilty and plead guilty so i do ask for the harshest of punishments like a Tombstone from the Reaper himself, in order to deter future DM's from abusing their privileges due to negligence!

LoreAndPeace

Esteemed Justices and Balif Jork, I present the case of the twice-cursed sword: My players recently finished a months-long quest to purify a cursed longsword. It had been possessed by the soul of an ancient knight, corrupted by the Abyss. The sword could speak to the wielder telepathically, and would often encourage violence and cruelty. Once purified, the knight returned to his original, noble personality. The players hated it. They said they missed his "wacky ideas" and have spent the last two sessions (10 total hours) actively looking for a way to corrupt the knight's soul again so he would "be less annoying". Justices, should I allow the players to once again twist my chivalrous knight's soul? I humbly await your ruling.

Final Girl

Dearest Judges and the guy who follows them around in sort of a sad way that we're all concerned about. I present the case of Party Vs NPC we hated. In a short campaign run by a run by a friend, our low level party encountered an NPC who was a grizzled long time adventurer who seemed to think we were a huge pain in the ass and kept telling us to give up on our quest (recovering a beloved Local artefact stolen by a necromantic cult) This guy was rude and abrupt and the DM described him as looking at us like 'dirt on his boot' In short, I hated him and didn't want to interact with him, a sentiment shared by most of the party. However the DM kept putting him places we were going, and making him integral to the story. Other players tried to give the benefit of the doubt and attempted to get to know him or explore a storyline with him, only to have him continue being an ass, calling them weak, being annoyed they were talking to him. At this point I called the guy a dick to his face, told him to fuck off and said we should stop bothering trying to engage with him. This seemed to bother the DM, and she said I shouldn't be so 'aggro' as he was very powerful. This guy then went on to be basically the main character of the campaign and adventure, driving me mental throughout as he was always a pain to interact with. Was I wrong to tell this dude to go kick rocks every time we met? I await judgement with my two cats Jack-o'-lantern & Bonnie, who said to tell Justice Oxford Hi

Marc Easton

To the Illustrious Supreme Crit Justices and the Bailiff Jorb I'm DMing for the first time and running Icewind Dale. I'm modifying it a bit, but most of the quests are mostly the same. My players are trying to catch a killer before he strikes again so they were trying to ask around the town to try and figure out who he might target. The problem is one of my players wanted to go to the "seedy underbelly" of a 1000 person fishing town to see if he could meet up with some criminals who would give him information. After I told him that there is no criminal enterprise secretly causing chaos in this small fishing town, he decided to accost a random person on the street to ask about the murders. Obviously the module has nothing for this so I roleplayed the person as 1. Not wanting to talk to him and 2. Not knowing anything about who the murderer might want to target next. He seemed displeased with this and wanted to move on to another random person on the street so I cut his scene short and moved on to another player in a different part of the town. The party eventually got some information but I think he feels like I snubbed him. His character was also competing with another character to see whose plan to get information would work. They both failed and the third player who actually rolled well got all the information. Dear sweet justices, did I do my player dirty by not making up a criminal underworld for this city and also having the random bystander not know what is going on? I await your judgement.

Laurel

To my beloved justices—I’ll keep it brief. Command only works when my DM wants it to. That is to say, in 5 years of play, it has worked exactly once and it was because the word the player chose was related to the monsters backstory in some way and was effectively a “word of power” that the monster then responded to and used to hurt us. (I believe the player said something like disappear and the monster then did some kind of annihilation spell on us). Anyway, we’ve decided these and other charm and compulsion type spells just aren’t worth trying because we are sure my DM just fudges every roll for these spells because he hates them. Really? The idiot Goliath, the wolf, and the mindless beast all wildly succeeded on their wisdom rolls with DCs upwards of 17? Am I being paranoid or are we right to find this highly suspicious. Thank you!

Spencer Stevenson

To the best balif in the biz...Jake May it please the court I bring to you the case of the removable rod In a one shot run by my brother, we were delving through a dungeon when we encountered a trap. A cursed axe was plunged in the far wall, in between us and the axe was an open casket with a skeleton in it. When our barbarian put his hand on the axe skin muscle and fats began to form around the spooky bone-man. Our barbarian let go and the bones went back to rest. Being a prepared dungeon deliver I of course had my trusty immovable rod (my only magic item) and the wit to use it. I stuck the rod lengthwise along the spine and clicked it in place with the button up top behind the ribs. When our barbarian pulled the axe from the wall the spooky bones became a vampire who on the first turn took an one of his attacks on himself and immediately turned off the immovable rod. When I expressed disappointment my brother DM rolled a "luck check" behind the screen and said "yep he does it" i can't help but feel a little cheated by this exchange and though I don't throw this around lightly I want to call him Rockefeller because it seems he loves railroads more than campaigns, I humbly await justice.

Will H

To the Supreme Crit Justices and the bailiff who, I think, is a pretty cool guy, I offer the case of the Narrativly Hostaged NPC. I DMed a homebrew campaign a few years ago with some friends. The campaign fizzled out for various reasons, but one instance certainly tainted my motivation to continue the story. My players were on a journey across a fantasy continent after their entire town was ruined by the BBEG. The townsfolk joined them on their quest to find a new home, or return to their old one with a vengeance. One of my players played a druid who has a daughter that travels with the party. I had made plans for there to be a side quest where the daughter would split from the party and travel seperatly with the rest of the townsfolk for a while. However, before I put this in motion, the player stated in casual conversation that the daughter was his backup character if his druid character died. He said that he would switch to the daughter NPC and turn her into a barbarian because she would be so full of rage after the death of her father. Now, I didn't have any intention of letting any main characters or NPCs die so early in the campaign, but I felt it grinded any potential for these characters to a halt. Suddenly the daughter NPC is being held narrativly hostage. The possibility of the druid's death would mean the story plans I had for the daughter are now gone, and the seperation or the death of the daughter would mean that the player would be upset that their surprise backup character was now gone. Justices, was I justified to feel narrativly constrained by this? (P.S. loved your Melbourne show)

JJ

The Case of the Ghosted Player If it so pleases the Honorable and most Magnificent judges..... Oh hey blake, didn't see you there I have been a player in a long-running campaign with a group who all gets along pretty well except for one player. He only engages in RP during combat, while the rest of the time he is playing games, looking at pornographic images, or watching videos on his phone. In addition, he spent an obscene amount of time picking his toenails and burping very close to other player’s faces. Nearing the final boss battle, I had my baby, so we paused the campaign for a few months while I recovered. When I was ready to play again, the group decided we were going to start a whole new campaign and simply not include the problem player. We essentially ghosted him, and our DM told the player we simply do not get together anymore when he asked when we would play again. I ask the court, was this ghosting justified? Or will my baby and I be haunted by Dice Christ for the rest of time?

Erin Perry

To the holy rollers of the highest church of Her Rolliness and little alter boy John, I come to you this day with a confession. A while ago in my current campaign, my DM gave us all custom feats after we reached an important story beat. Part of my feat was access to my very own familiar, but the stipulation was that she had to use the stat block of an abyssal chicken at all times for story reasons. While not the most useful for scouting, this little chicken comes in clutch in battle often, most recently allowing me to twin spell cure wounds, as my chicken and my PC were able to touch separate party members. Apostles... I recently found out that I've been using the unearthed arcana statblock this whole time, as it was the first result on Google images. If I'd paid just a bit more attention, I would've realized the image came from the unearthed arcana subreddit. The real abyssal chicken has blindsight in a 30ft range, but is blind beyond that, meaning that half of this chicken's clutch moves I would never have been able to do bc the chicken wouldn't be able to see the target to cast the spell on them or move to them. I have since begun to use the right stat block, but how can I begin to right this wrong?

Funmi the Flamingo!

May it please the Crit and its benevolent justices oh and also I guess Jake? Is there too. I bring you the case of the rescinded invitation. Many years ago in undergrad I attempted to start a campaign with a group of friends that fell through due to scheduling. One person in particular let’s call her Jessica after this campaign fell through said she had little interest in Playing dnd and didn’t care to be included in the future. Months pass and I the ever persistent DM try again to establish a campaign with the same friends, but NOW many members of this friend group have had a falling out centered around Jessica’s behavior. Keeping in mind her request not to be included I did not invite her to this new game. She then became very upset and accused me to taking sides and excluding her because of the previous falling out ( I tried to remain neutral because the issue was about a boy and I simply did not want to become involved) but I didn’t invite her because she asked me not to. (That campaign also fell through but after two more attempts I finally got a long term group together and we have been playing for a year!) I am no longer friends with Jessica but I still wonder should I have invited her even though she asked me not to previously or was I correct in respecting her pre falling out request? I lay myself before the justices!

Annika

To the lavender-scented judges and the pea-scented bailiff Jake. I bring forth the case of the illiterate dragon: My boyfriend DMs a campaign with me and my sisters. My pact of the chain warlock was in a trial that involved stealing an egg guarded by a dragon and her magical wards. For my turn, I had my lovely pseudodragon familiar (who can understand common and draconic) fly to the egg and read the draconic glyphs guarding it, then translate the details to me via our telepathic bond. My dm ruled that my familiar can’t read because “although it understands draconic, it cannot speak”. I lost the argument but have since stayed salty. Judges, am I wrong to be offended on behalf of my son who is a very smart and special boy?! I prostrate myself before your 80 foot tall bench.

SiDeath

Hello wonderful judges and anyone else reading this. I bring you to the case of the fey wild sleep. During an early level up session, one of our characters selected Fey Touched despite never having met the fey. As the DM, I concluded this meant we needed a side session or two to meet the fey to earn the feat. When the party next set out on the road, they came across on overturned cart surrounded by fog. The players stopped to investigate and the fog lashed out at them. The two human players fell into a magical sleep but the elf character contended that she was immune to sleep. After a quick discussion, I ruled that because her immunity stemmed from the Fey and that this was a fey sleep trap, she wouldn’t be immune to this sleeping effect (also, come on man, I’m trying to do a thing here). She took it well but I feel bad about it all the time. Was I asleep at the DM wheel or did she need to take a nap? I await your judgment.

timweather

To the properly inflated judges and the woefully under-inflated bailiff, Jwerk. I present to you the case of the Reluctant Murderhobo. I played at a home game with a (too large) group of 9 PCs, many of whom were new to the game. It became clear early on that about half the table was afraid to make any decisions, and they began capturing the last survivor of any encounter and interrogating them for upwards of an hour before deciding to move on. I remained patient at first, but reading the body language of the other half of the group, I began using my Drow Rogue to speed things up, namely by slitting the throats of the captured enemies mid-interrogation, much to the horror of half the group, and the delight of the other half. Judges, I beseech you, was I wrong to put the enemies and, let’s be honest, half of the table, out of our collective misery? Or should I have allowed the new players to continue to take us all hostage? I await your wise and fair judgment.

Darryl M

May it please the magnanimous justices, and the lowly (just one lowly!) bailiff. This case is born out of the struggle between duties as a DM and duties as a partner. My wife is a non-player, but she agreed to play at a party we threw for my closest friends before our wedding. I was DM, and we played one of the Candlekeep Mysteries. My wife wanted to play a "beverage goblin" artificer/alchemist. Everything was fun. At the end, the whole party, wife included, had used most of their spell slots. The big boss of this mystery was definitely tougher than expected, and I didn't want a TPK. So I let a potion give back 1d4 spell slots. My wife rolled a 4. As we were playing a pretty low level, her character only had 3 spell slots. I told her she got back her 3. She said as the to-be wife of the DM she should get 4. I was shocked at the demand and said no, your character only has 3 spell slots and you got them all back. Eventually she relented. But now she tells the story and asks "what's the point of sleeping with the DM if you can't get any perks?" Your honors and bailiff, should I have just given my wife the 4th spell slot? Or did I faithfully execute the role of DM? If it is the latter, I'm seeking an injunction to prevent my wife from telling the story of her only D&D game in this manner. Thank you.

Alex W

To the Highest Supreme Crit and bailiff jork: Should I kill one of my pcs because he keeps beating my partner in poker? I dm a game with my partner and two other people. One of the PCs plays poker with my partner most weekends (the other is my dad). My partner is by no means bad at poker, but he is unlucky. Our friend keeps taking my partner’s entire buy in on absurdly lucky hands, most notably beating my partner with aces full of twos vs tens full of twos on a full house on the river. Is it my duty as a partner to kill our friend’s wild magic sorcerer?

Jared Bloom

Howdy hey to the crit justices and rowdy nay to the bailiff Jorts. I present to you the case of The Players vs. Accents. My group is starting a new Spelljammer meets Dune campaign and our DM told us this will be equal parts combat and role play, so he’s asking us to put some extra attention on our characters and is encouraging us to do voices. One of our players will be doing a Macho Man-type voice (nice), another will be doing a Talia al Ghul (rad), and I’m straight up ripping off Boggy’s voice (epic). I bring you to our fourth. She’s playing a seafaring rogue tiefling and has chosen to do a… let’s call it… a Jamaican accent. I’d say it’s closer to Dre Head from Harry Potter. Being a group of people NOT from Jamaica, I suggested that she maybe do a Jack Sparrow voice. But no. She doubled down and talked like that all during session zero. As a table amongst friends and not being recorded for a mass audience, is a voice like this closer to problematic and distracting or is it a goof we should just ride out in hopes that she decides to change it? I humbly await your verdict

BT Bishop

To the nine foot tall justices and the grapefruit-sized bailiff. Recently I ran a short dark fantasy campaign for three of my friends set in a grimdark world where magic and the gods had all vanished long ago. All three players submitted appropriately tragic backstories. One of them had been exiled from her knightly order when it was discovered that she'd been writing inappropriate poetry about another knight's fair lady - great stuff. But when she explained this story to the group she dropped in another detail she hadn't previously run by me - before this happened she'd kissed said fair lady's hand and, in an excess of repressed emotion, came in her pants. This really blindsided me. We ran with it and I think we managed to make it work but isn't it wack as hell to just drop something like this on your DM without warning when they're trying to conjure up a mood of bleak fantasy? PS I'm just joshing, I love Welly and the came in her pants bit was the highlight of the campaign but I know if this had really been from a home game Murph would have given it the most almighty side-eye.

Matthew J

To the honorable jakestices and bailiff Amir, I humbly bring before you the Case of the Dhampir Mutineer. A few years ago, our party was on a mission to cross the high seas and save our party’s abducted Sorcerer. While she waited for her original PC to be rescued, the Sorcerer played “Maria,” an Artificer who was secretly half-vampire. One fateful session, my Paladin, who had been elected captain by the rest of the party, was keeping watch at the helm. When I asked the party’s Bard, “Trevor,” to take the wheel, Maria announced that she wanted to grab the wheel instead, prompting a contested Athletics check that Trevor won easily. Maria reacted by biting him with her secret vampire fangs. I tried to avoid full PVP by grappling Maria and asking for an explanation, but instead of answering any questions, she had her robot companion shoot me in the back. The party then collectively turned on her, and Trevor, convinced that she was a full vampire, finished her off while she was rolling death saves. After tying her up, we brought Maria back to life with a Revivify spell so we could get answers (and, out of game, to give the player a second chance with the character). For the next hour, we begged her to give any explanation about the vampirism or why we should trust her going forward, while she refused to explain herself, apologize, or acknowledge any wrongdoing. When our characters stepped off to the side to discuss how to proceed, she tried to break free of her bonds and escape. We knocked her back to 0 HP, and, seeing no other course of action that made sense in character, we ultimately decided to kill her. For some context, this was not the only time that this player initiated PVP, but it was the only time that it resulted in a character death. Justices, were we wrong to kill our friend’s character twice, or were we justified in executing an unapologetic instigator? We humbly await your judgment.

Austin

To the splendiferous Judges and Baliff Papa John! I present the case of the uncontestable check. Playing a game with a couple friends and a DM we had found online that we didn't know. Our party took a job from a shady fellow to get a valuable item from the back room of a casino. My plasmoid, circle of stars druid (yes i'm actually playong a Goo-id) eventually got to the back rooms alone and found the item we needed. But I was attacked by the same shady fellow we had taken the job from. I got hit with a bunch of damage from a throwing knife so I retreated with the item and Misty stepped under the door back to my friends. As the DM allowed me to do this he rolled a Sleight of Hand check at the same time and got a Nat 20, he exclaimed that I Misty Step and appear by my friends but the item I had was gone. I didn't know how he was able to take it in the first place being at a distance when he attacked, but I said since I had it directly in my hands that it should have been a contested roll. I would also have to roll a Nat 20 but the DM didn't let me try. Later on in the session, (because we roll digital dice on Roll20) I could see the Sleight of Hand modifier for the shady fellow was a +20. I was a level 6 character so I had no chance of beating it regardless. Was I roped into an unwinnable situation facing a +20 Sleight of Hand or was Dice Christ against me by giving the DM a Nat 20 anyways?

Malon

To the honourable Justices and sort-of-okay Bailiff of the Supreme Crit, pllease accept my Dice Christ confession: I am playing in a campaign with my friends, in which we discovered a tower surrounded by zombies on three sides; the other side being a steep hill. With some good rolls and one PC who can fly, we managed to evade the undead and climb the tower. I had the bright idea of throwing flasks of oil onto the horde to burn them from safety. The plan worked perfectly, and our DM gave us inspiration for the out-of-the-box thinking. My confession? I didn't have a flask of oil, and neither did anyone else. I was so sure I did that I just brushed past it and said I threw one down on my first turn, which I then lit using a cantrip. The fire spread and was a big contributor to finishing the encounter faster. When we got back to town I subtracted the cost of a flask of oil from my inventory and bought two to make up for it, but I ask you: Have I done enough to satisfy Dice Christ?

Adam

To the right honourable judges, and- hey Jake, didn't know you worked here! See you at the BBQ on Saturday? I bring the case of First Time Players v. Long Time DM: This happened years ago during my first time ever playing DnD. A coworker of mine had DMd forever and offered to get a game going with some fellow workmates, all first time players. We were starting at level 1, so I built a fairly normal Fighter, son of a monster hunter who was travelling for the first time with his father's sword. I chatted with the DM during creation and he was happy with the character "Yep, sounds cool" he said. The problem arises during the first session. The DM had been a lot more engaged with other players back stories than mine, one being a son of a genie, and the other being a Goliath that had become a hero to his town by PUNCHING A DRAGON, pre level 1! The game itself was fairly fun and lasted a couple of months, but it always was a bit weird when anyone mentioned their fantastical past, and I was just some normal dude. Justices, am I wrong for having more realistic expectations for a level 1 character or should the DM have given me a heads up at least?

Swarm Of Rats

Highest Judges, Bailiff and other Honorifics, I present to you the case of the cook who did not know that some mushrooms were poisonous. I play Pam, a Gnome Gourmet (a wonderful homebrew class: a tank that hands out buffs via breakfast to their party) in a long-running campaign. We've played for about 3 years, have reached a ridiculous amount of sessions and I hold the game, the other players, and our DM dearly in my heart. However there is one moment that still bugs me when I think of it: Neverwinter was lacking a leader with the disappearance of its previous Lord. Through some convincing and having powerful friends, we managed to set up that the newest leader was going to be elected through a cooking competition, among other challenges. It was a fun bunch of sessions with said competition planned to be the grand finale. My Gourmet spent days hunting for ingredients from the most adventurous spots - we went on a sailing trip to find a magnificent shark, went to faraway cities to collect spices and finally to the forest near Neverwinter to butcher a living mushroom. We've encountered these mushrooms many times before, and they had various effects on us, forcing us to dance and similar and leaving these weird glittering spores with one of their attacks. We never learned what the spores did, since we always washed them off fast enough. This plan to use one of these mushrooms for my Gourmet's grand meal has been one I've shared many times, and yet our DM never once asked me "if I'm sure about that" or prompted a roll or just told me that that might not be a good idea. Not when Pam announced her plan. Not when we hunted the thing. Not when we kidnapped it. Not when she put it into the meal next to some Dust of Deliciousness (a shameful thing for a Gourmet that Pam still regrets). So, come the serving and eating of the meal, the judges started tasting it, and then they suddenly turned crazed, gobbling up the shark in its mushroom sauce as if their life depended on it. It turned out that with the Dust, Pam's excellent cooking, and the mushroom slices, she had created a meal so good that they had no other choice than eating it in its entirety, only for them all to start showing signs of sickness, running of the stage. Luckily there were enough powerful mages present to cure them. Still, it was a disaster. I think it's a good to let players make bad choices. But I also think that sometimes your character should be allowed to be knowledgable in their specialty even if the player forgets the fact that mushrooms can be dangerous. So judges, am I wrong for thinking that my Gourmet should haven gotten any hint that this is a bad call, instead of nearly turning into an involuntary assassin?

BrandedNerd

Honorable justices and Jake I bring you the most important case of your lives. For my case is against Dice Christ, themself. I roll bad. Not low but bad. I have always accepted this and this is not what I hold against Dice Christ. For I believe the nat 1s are just as fun as the nat 20s. My case is that Dice Christ has made me their plaything and enjoys mocking me. I once had a point of exhaustion and rolled 3 nat 20s I couldn’t use cause of the disadvantage but even that I tried to laugh off. However, this latest offense I cannot just let go. A couple sessions ago my phantom rogue/cleric Hotaru was downed in combat. When it came to my turn I already had 1 failed death save from a ranged attack so a nat 1 would mean instance death. Normally I never take the Lucky feat but the new background rules gave it to me so I decided to use my last luck point on the roll. I then declared, out loud, to my friends “don’t worry the only way I’m insta dead is if both of these are nat 1s” as I dropped the dice. I looked down in total shock. My friends all thought I was kidding and I couldn’t speak for in the tray looking back at me were 2 nat 1s. Hotaru was dead and we had no way to revive her or so we thought. It turns out my DM, a notoriously good roller (he once rolled 3 nat 20s in a row and insta-killed a different character of mine in a previous campaign) had rolled for the loot we got from that battle and on the leader of baddies was a revivify scroll. However it had definitely taken my party more than a minute to find the scroll. Then my DM remembered my Ring of Mind Shielding and ruled that my soul was still with my body just in the ring so the time limit on revivify didn’t apply. They used the scroll and brought Hotaru back to life and my Ring of Mind Shielding was destroyed in the process. So justices I ask you to rule, is Dice Christ allowed to fuck with me this much?

Brock

To the Noble Clergy of Dice Christ! i come before yall not with a confession, but with a question because no matter what you decide im still gonna keep doing it. So i have a pretty common learning disability; dyscalculia which makes even the simplest of math problems embarrassingly difficult and uncomfortably long to figure out especially during something you wanna keep fast paced like combat. Unfortunately im also cursed with a pretty bad case of Murphism and can often go through whole 4 hour sessions without rolling above a 10. So to combat my awful math abilities i’ve started using Dnd Beyond to roll my dice which will automatically add up all my damage or proficiency bonuses. However i have also noticed now that im using an online roller im rolling astronomically better, and critting multiple times a session! So i ask the church, do i walk with the dice devil now that i have strayed away from physical dice and prevent the other players from hearing the click clack everyone keeps talking about? or am i just being blessed by dice christ through the power of the internet? or have i finally killed god with my machine? ps hate the show and ive never listened to it and if i did, it probably wouldn’t help me laugh when im at my lowest

Aiden S

To the steamy judges and the little tiny bailiff jork, I present the case of the amnesiac cleric. I was DMing a campaign for the first time, and a player asked if her character, a halfling light cleric, could have amnesia. I agreed, thinking it could be a cool story thing as the campaign progressed and she could roleplay remembering details about her backstory, etc. However, once we started playing it became clear she had simply not planned her backstory. Her character had forgotten everything including her god, her family, where she was from, literally everything. I came up with backstory details for her, but she never discovered them, and often glossed over the clues and hints I gave her because nothing "rang a bell". Judges, should I have vetoed this cleric's clinical amnesia? Or was it a cool character choice that we handled poorly?

Erica B

Oh wise Justices and Less Wise But He Makes Up For It With A Heart Of Gold Bailiff, a philosophical and Zen question for you: If a paladin casts Command in the woods and no one hears it, does the NPC still know they've been enchanted? The new 5.5 rules for Command say nothing about the target creature needing to hear you, so my players thought they could cast it stealthily. But I ruled the NPC would still have felt the spell target their mind. Judges, was I right to say this ruined the party's surprise and then to drop a fireball on their hiding spot? I await your wisdom.

2fastBicurious

To the most honorable justices, even my burpless brethren the baby bailiff. . . Blake? May it please the court and give you all the most supreme crit. ;) I'd like to submit the case of the quiet Kenku. My table was running a home brew campaign and we were getting close to finding and fighting our BBEG. Our party included a kenku, Crowbar, who played by the mimic rules that he could only repeat words and sounds he had heard before. The BBEG was hidden away on another plane and to get to him, we had to enter a cave full of grueling puzzles and traps to reach a portal. We barely made it through alive. At the end of the cave, our DM announced that we would be silent and communicate only in written form or telepathically, (though no one one in our crew had the message cantrip). We were presented with a written riddle (think "speak friend and enter" style puzzle). Part of the riddle was solving for the answer, the other part was determining who could say the answer. If we answered wrong, or the wrong person spoke we were told the reaction would be TPK bad, and we were very weak already from the cave. We sat around the table passing notes, and determined the answer to the riddle was "Onomotopoeia" and the person to give the answer was a choice between either the youngest member of our party, or the physically smallest member of our party. The problem? Crowbar was both. Crowbar vehemently insisted there was no way he would have heard the word onomotopoeia before and therefore could not speak it. Our DM knew going into this that Crowbar was both the smallest and youngest and seemed to be gleeful about our predicament. After several pleas to both the DM and Crowbar to try to find a loophole we conceded we could not solve the puzzle currently. I suggested we take a long rest, exit the cave, teach Crowbar onomotopoeia, rest again, and come back, as it seemed the only solution. In the process, we ran out of potions on the way out, and on the way back our cleric, the party's only healer, went down, and she failed her death saves. My hexblade warlock attempted to call upon my patron for help without success. In the end only 3 party members of our 6 member crew, including myself and Crowbar made it to the end concious. Crowbar triumphantly said Onomotopoeia and the gate opened. Our session ended feeling empty and hollow. In real life there was a fight after the session. The players expressed we were upset at Crowbar for being so stubborn and at the DM for intentionally putting us in this situation. Crowbar argued that's how his character has always been and we shouldn't expect him to change because of a bad in game situation. The DM argued that we could have been teaching Crowbar words throughout the campaign before this so we wouldn't be here. I said it was an intentionally obscure word and we had no reason to teach it. Our DM laughed at me for being so upset, so I got up and left with the cleric, saying we were going to start a new campaign. Later, Crowbar texted me and said I had overreacted to a simple difficult scenario, and that if that's how I reacted when things didn't go my way, then no one would ever want me in their dnd party. I feel justified in being mad, but wonder if I didn't react too strongly. So I come to the mercy of the court asking, was I wrong to take the Murph response of "find new friends" or was my DM being unreasonable? I humbly await your judgement and accept whatever punishment I may receive.

Maddie

Dearly beloved justices, and bailiff juice- two years ago, my friend and I joined a dnd game online. Fast forward to four months ago, the dm and I are now happily dating and very much in love! We assured the rest of the players that I would receive no favoritism or spotlight hogging, but that isn’t completely true. Since we started dating, my boyfriend has started telling me all the secrets of his campaign unprompted. This includes: what monsters we’ll be fighting each week, cool homebrew abilities he gave them, the loot they’ll drop, traps we’ll encounter, puzzles we’ll have to solve and their answers, bits and pieces of lore we have yet to uncover, and more. When I ask him why he’s telling me all this, he says “because I want to get your opinion, I want to make sure it’s balanced/fun/challenging”. Justices, how do I balance being supportive, while wanting to return to only having player knowledge about the campaign? He’s so excited about his game, and I do love hearing him talk about it, but at the same time it’s hard for me to separate my character’s knowledge with my own. I have to be silent during traps and puzzles because I already have the answers. I go into every fight knowing exactly how the enemy is going to destroy us. Should I continue to keep quiet or tell my boyfriend I don’t want to talk about his campaign out of session anymore?

Matthew Harvey

To the Court of the Crit and Jeffery, I bring the case of the wind-walk nerd. My DM laid out a mission that would take us out of town in the woods, three days travel time. This would have affected upcoming in game plans and the intention was to limit the amount of fuckery we could preform to weaken the city before invading (city was evil, don't worry) HOWEVER with a necklace of prayer beads we had access to the spell windwalk which let's you move 30x normal travel. When we asked to skip the walk with the spell the DM simply said "no" and said it would only cut on day travel, instead of making the side quest a one day task. Justice should be have accepted the nerf despite the fact this DM is usually RAW all the way espically when coming to spell uses

Jake Shurley

To the Ever Unified Supreme Crit Justices and the Ever Beloved Baliff Jake Hurwitz who I will defend the honor of in the parking lot of a Waffle House (I am not biased I swear), I bring to you only one simple question, Who Killed Mett the Automaton, the Character or the DM? A few years ago in a homebrew campaign, whilst hiking through the wilderness of a frozen tundra, we came upon the aftermath of a dragon attack on a caravan. Searching through, we found the lone survivor, an automaton who just then “awoke” for the first time. He was really friendly; real golden retriever energy, so we named him Mett and brought him along. Night time came, so we dug a hole for us to sleep in, and Mett offered to take night watch alone since we didn’t need to sleep. We all turned in early except for one character, our Warlock/Barbarian named Veltin. Veltin had been a very introspective quest because of the nature of his pact with an Ancient Ice Dragon. Veltin and Mett spoke with each other for a bit before Veltin retired for the night after leaving Mett with one last question. “What is Justice?” We all woke and thought everything was alright. Justices and Bailiff Jake Hurwitz!!! All was not alright. We awoke to the scrawlings of a madman on the snow walls and a crazed Mett muttering to himself about Justice. We all tried to calm him down until the DM stated “Mett’s eyes go dim and he drops to the ground motionless” After a quick moral dilemma, we shoved his corpse into our bag of holding and moved along with the adventure. After the session, I joked around with the DM about “How he killed Mett” which, to my surprise, he was confused about. He told me that He did not kill Mett, but Veltin did since he asked a question without one correct answer. I countered that he was the DM, he controlled the world and NPCs and could dictate who lives and dies, and he chose to kill Mett, which meant he the DM was the killer of Mett. The DM doubled down and said that Veltin was the one who killed Mett since he was the one who asked the question that caused his death. We agreed to disagree and even though we still jokingly argue about it from time to time, the DM, Veltin’s player, and I still play together to this day. So Justices and Bailiff Jake Hurwitz, I ask you to settle this argument once and for all. Who killed Mett the Automaton? Veltin or the DM?

Jack Reboul

A confessional - I throw myself at the mercy of the most esteemed members of the church of dice Christ, and that groundskeeper rake. Dice Christ has punished me for my sin of greed, by cursing my natural 20 on an athletics check to lead directly to the demise of my most beloved wildfire druid Kirri, and potential deaths of her innocent party members You see, I was in a deadly dungeon crawl in a party of 3. I had just been cursed by a statue, and had gained the ability to succeed on a failed dex save, at the cost of my character turning evil and becoming jumpy and skittish. Soon after, my character opened a door out of which tumbled hundreds of bones, almost burying my character! Naturally, I rolled played her newfound skittishness and ran out of the room in fear. But you see, my personal, real life lust for loot for too strong! I disregarded roleplay and I had Kirri go back into that room to see what was behind the bones. My curiosity was rewarded! There dangled a treasure chest from the ceiling, just out of reach! I jumped for it, and my DM had me roll an athletics check. A natural 20! Words cannot describe my DMs cackle at this success. They said that my roll was insane because the natural 20 was the only way my noodle arms of a druid was able to muster the strength to leap for and open that chest. As I did so, a trap was triggered, and the floor under me opened up. I was asked for a dex save to not fall in, which I failed. I opted not to use my ability to succeed on a check because I thought it was funny, and maybe a worthy punishment for my greed. Esteemed judges, long story short I got pummeled to death by 8 poltergeists at the bottom on the hole while the rest of my party got paralyzed by another cursed statue attempting to save me! Now Kirri is dead, and the poltergeists will surely turn on my party members. This encounter will resolve on the weekend , and I throw myself at your mercy. I understand why I must be punished, but can dice Christ save my party? What must I do? I humbly await your judgement

Jannic

To the Justices Three and the Bailiff Wee, I present the case of the Offscreen Survivor. I ran part of a giant "West Marches" continent sized sandbox game, where 40-odd PC's (2-3 per player) formed an adventuring guild. Whoever was free showed up for one session mini adventures as we explored the wild frontier of our old homeland, from which we'd fled and couldn't as a society remember why. Much fun was had, but one player's relationship with their primary bard PC was very intense - fanfic, hours of out of session roleplay, high-effort art - and they came to dread their PC possibly dying. It was a pretty lethal game at that time! The head DM / campaign founder's solution was, after emotional negotiations, that the bard would never die - even in a TPK, they'd somehow survive, retire and slink off home. This made some other players deeply upset - they felt like they were being punished for not making a big enough fuss by not being able to save their own PCs 'Offscreen' after death, and resented that in the event of a party wipe they'd die while the Bard tragically rode away, probably sobbing, but definitely not eaten by monsters. Moreover, we had signed up for gritty realism and now had a bizarre meta fix hanging over possibly bad outcomes - we probably wouldn't have WANTED free passes but weren't offered them and it stung. We all kept playing but many of us never took our fave PC's out with the bard again. I have always wondered whether accommodating an apparently deep emotional sensitivity in one player was worth rankling everyone else. Should we have honored that this player clearly had issues the bard was wrapped up in, or were we right to call foul on them getting their own 'post credits scene' privileges?

Dave 3D Art

I need legal counsel, ASAP. I'm double-booked on Friday. Should I play Dungeons and Dragons with Andrew, or should I play Cyberpunk Red with Richard?

Tykora

To the honorable justices and the recently dishonorably demoted jork today i bring you the case of the immunity ignoring monstrosities. I run a home brew campain where i made a homebrew modified twig blight thats whole deal is that its fast it glitchs in and out of reality as it moves andvit grapples. The whole point of these things was to grab the player and either scatter the party or drag them into a dragon's breath attack so here is the issue onecof my players is playing a wild fire druid so they were made to fight these as they are weak to fire and the wildfire spirit can teleport them out of the grapple, but what i didnt realize at the time is that the wildfire spirit is also immune to grapple which would break the whole combat mechanic so i decided mid session when i found this out that the modified twig blights ignored grapple immunity the table was mostly accepting of this because i had told the table before hand that i had a few homebrew mechanics that broke the traditional rules alittle in this fight. Now i ask the honorable justices and jork was i wrong for ignoring the immunity for the sake of preserving the fun of the session?

Barely Competent Roll-Players

To the suave and smexy judges. Oh and Jake is there. Man imagine being so lame to be named Jake...couldn't be me. Anyways I present the story of the time I didnt died? Long story short we are playing Curse of struad fighting one of his wives in a duel. She had said it was to test us not kill us so she wouldnt use high level spells if we followed the rules. (We where like level 5 at that time) we said we where trying to kill her so no rules. She was a bladesinger so I used heat metal so she couldnt use her swords. We did way better than our dm expected which was frustrating him. But our paladin went down so I went to heal him. But when I did she used bigbys hand and attacked me and critted. I was already low and she did over my maxed health in negative. (I was a warlock) so I declared "I am dead" My dm chucked and said "you mean down right?" And I responded with "Oh no she did so much damage I am outright dead." He looked shocked since he was a new dm. I had dm'd before and my other friend who was a dm looked over and confirmed I was in fact very dead. My current dm freaked out not meaning to have killed me outright and insited that I didnt die. And instead I lost a limb. Which everyone agreed it was fine. But to be honest im kinda miffed I didnt die. The game lost some steaks after that and fizzled out so we never finished. I always think back and wish my dm had just committed and killed my ass. I probably should have said something but he was new and no one else wanted me to die but I'm still a little disappointed I didn't. Please sentence my dm to start and run this game again so we can finish it or sentence me for being a masochist who wants to die I guess I dont know I'm not a judge.

Dayvis7

To the honorable Crit Justice's and the baby Bailiff, I present the Flip flop TPK. I am part of a campaign that has been going on for 3-4 years. It is a modern day campaign and has been very fun. Myself and another friend of my who is my DM in another campaign play characters that I will admit are pretty min-maxed myself playing a warlock-sorcerer for lots of eldritch blasts at level 15 and my friend a barbarian gunslinger with +15 initiative. My DM walks in one day, before my friend who plays the barbarian fighter gets there, and says "I'm going to kill Andrew's character today". Me and my other friend kinda laugh nervously, and we start playing. We end up in a facility that we are trying to infiltrate, and are trying to unlock a door. Suddenly gas canister is launched into the room we are in and, we are all told to make DC 20 con saves only the barbarian and I pass, and everyone else is instantly unconscious. The barbarian sneaks around the corner and sees a truck with about 12 more gas canisters and some people. Trying to get the upper hand my fired throws a fireball granade. My DM them proceeds to tell us that the fore ball hits, and explodes all the canisters plus the gas already in the room and our whole party is going to take 13+ fireballs as all of them explode. After telling our DM that this will kill our whole party he finally relents and we all just take a single fireball worth damage. He then says, " actually, no you are all going to take the full damage, and has us help him roll 104 Dr's that ends up being over 450 damage! We convince him again that all our characters will die and this will be a stupid way to have our 3-4 year campaign end and he again says we just take the single fireball damage. After we start to move one my DM says "you know what screw you guys" and we all take the 450+ damage and are instantly vaporized with all our equipment. So I beg the judges, was my party wronged for not getting a fighting chance before being TPK'd or am I wrong for playing a power build, I humbly await your judgements.

Gavin Sohnrey

To the most honorable justices and lowly but respectable bailiff may I present the Case of the Untouchable Druid. I was running my first long term campaign for my girlfriend and some of our friends. We were all using D&D Beyond and my girlfriend was playing a homebrew Dryad Circle of Dreams druid. One of the species features of this homebrew was adding your wisdom modifier to your AC, which led to her being extremely hard to hit by most of the enemies that I thought I should be throwing at the party at low levels. The campaign went on like this for a while with me mostly just improvising my way through, not really putting too much prep work into anything and never really challenging the party in combat. This is when I started listening to NADDPod. Inspired by Murph's style I decided to really dig in and start actually planning some cool stuff for my players, starting with making combat encounters more dynamic and interesting. The first step that I took toward this was to thoroughly go over all of their character sheets to know what I was up against. I noticed while doing this that my girlfriend's AC was extremely high due to an error with the homebrew species on D&D Beyond accidentally adding the wisdom modifier to her AC twice instead of once. I rectified this mistake and lowered her character's AC to the correct amount, from 22 to 17, and let her know about the change. She was furious, saying that "It's been over 20 sessions without a problem so why change it now". I stood my ground and enforced the change in an effort to run a more compelling game, but I fear this worked a little too well. The very next session they were confronted with a cult they had been tracking for a while. This cult had just finished the ritual necessary to make 2 flesh golems. Those along with the cultists and 2 mages proved to be too much for the party, and my girlfriend's character died in combat. She blamed this on me, saying I nerfed her character too hard, and said she didn't want to play anymore. This actually ended the whole campaign and we haven't seen those characters since. So I ask the court, was I wrong to lower her AC after 20+ sessions of not noticing it? (P.S. we have since started a different campaign with mostly the same group that has been more enjoyable for all of us, so it all worked out.)

chaos staci

Greeting Bailiffs and Irreverent Justice Jake Horbits. I present to you the Retcon Lightning Wand. I run a level 4 campaign. Our warlock has scheduling issues so he will pop in and out of the game occasionally using his PC from one of our previous games with another DM. We explain his absence by his Patron being a genie that teleports him away whenever he needs entertainment. This means I haven't been able to fully read his character sheet and inventory. In a prior campaign, that DM gave us overpowered items at level 2. An assassin was running off with a plot item, and Warlock says he wants to use his Wand of Lightning (from the other DM). I said no. No one else has a rare item yet, and the potential damage would merc this important NPC and ruin a main plot hook. Warlock was visibly unhappy with my decision and didn't return, but I wouldn't have let him have the item if I'd had the chance to see his inventory. The other players are on my side, even Warlock's wife. Am I a bad DM for not allowing this player, who is more like a tourist of the campaign, use a rare item I didn't give him? Should I have let this tourist player destroy a plot hook for the sake of cool and fun? I await your judgement, Jake.

Sean Boyle

To the most honorable Justices, btw thanks for bringing back Justice Axford. Her run as bailing was brilliant but I didnt trust the temp guy you had for a while. Oh also to the other one I guess (think his name is Jank or somthing?). I present the case of Serial Awakener. I ran a DnD campaign that lasted about a year and a half playing once a month. Few sessions in my Druid decided to cast Awaken on his horse, It was my first experience with the spell and once he explained what it did I delightfully narrated the horse awakening into a libertarian shithead who had a lot of opinions. The party loced and so did the druid. A few sessions later he decided to Awaken a massive tree to help them cover ground quickly in a forest to reach an ambush on time to stop it. I made the tree a pacifist to make it not helpful in combat. Then again he uses awaken on a hawk to distract some guards. He would take the eight hours necessary ahead of time to prepare the spell into a stone which is specified in the spell that it is how it works. I thought it was all buttoned up. After the campaign fizzled out due to scheduling conflicts I on a whim decided to look at the spell. Justices its a 5th level spell. My party never got above level 6. It shouldn't have ever been possible for him to have the spell. I checked his character sheet on dnd Beyond and it turned out he had the staff of the woodland that gave him access to it. Its a rare item. I let them choose a few magic items at the beginning of the campaign but I dont remember if I allowed them to take a rare or not. But even if I did surely it could've been assumed that items that let you cast high level spells at level 3 should have been avoided. On the other time the awakenings were always funny and we all had a good time so Justices I ask you. Should I call him out on it or I just let the fun times we had be fun times and not attempt to razz him for his PC overreach? I leave it in your trustworthy hands.

Britney

Fabulous justices and diligent bailiff, I present the case of the Smarty-Pants Star Spawn Hulk. When the DM for my table was traveling, the players decided to play a one-shot. To minimize prep, we did a pure combat session and used our campaign characters. I volunteered to DM and set up an arcade-style combat with a few fight options, borrowing from Murph’s Boobs vs the Astral Dadnaught one-shot. The players chose the fight featuring a star spawn hulk and a stone golem. Our wizard, having just gotten access to 5th level spells, rolled a nat 20 on initiative and cast Wall of Force to completely encompass the stone golem. I figured they might just speed run the encounter - until I realized that the Star Spawn Hulk has 7 Int, which seemed high enough to deduce that he should focus all his attacks on the wizard to free his friend. I even rolled an Int check for him to make this calculation and he got a 16. On the Star Spawn Hulk’s second round of attacks on the wizard, he failed a Con save, broke concentration, and the wall vanished. I could tell the wizard was bummed and maybe feeling a little cheated, though he took it very gracefully. With the stone golem free, the party proceeded to win a close fight. The wizard even got the finishing blow, critting twice as a hasted, polymorphed T-Rex. HOWEVER, I can’t stop feeling guilty that I robbed the wizard of his awesome new spell. So I ask the justices: was my Star Spawn Hulk smart enough to know to take out the wizard, or was I being a meta-gaming DM and taking away my players’ fun toys? I throw myself at the mercy of the court.

Wings of Silver

I prostrate myself before the church and ask if I have done wrong in the eyes of dice Christ, During an online d&d campaign me and some friends played via tabletop simulator, I played a snooty uptight nobleman I named Lawrence Lerlous Von Einswald. I gave him my most annoying British accent and it was my intention for him to be annoying but eventually learn how to act as a proper adventurer as character development. I made a few honest mistakes as this was one of the few times I played d&d, and eventually I abandoned the party during a difficult combat. I had good story reasons for leaving and I was also going on holiday IRL, I put a lot of though into Lawrences story and didn't want him to just become an NPC controlled by the dm. I ask the church, was I wrong to care so much about my fancy lad? I accept any punishment you deem necessary.

Thimo The Fool

May it please the court, greatly and deeply, sensually even. The bailiff may watch, if they have to. I present to you the case of "your character, but better" Recently my DM sprung a large battle upon us, outnumbering us 13 to 4. Note that this was the German rules of DSA ("Das Schwarze Auge") not DND, but your judgement should be guiding and truthful as always. In the battle, my heroic pirate, fighting dirty with a blade in each hand, squared up against the boss of the slave merchant group, who also boasted a dual wielding fighting style. Fast forward two rounds, and he had disarmed my character twice, in an advanced manoeuvre that I didn't even know existed. It was funny, as my character pulled out more and more weapons to be promptly disarmed again, but when the players pointed out the similarities between the characters, the DM, kind of proudly, maybe a smich apologetic said: "yeah, I constructed them as a better version of your character, who has been doing it for longer" Judges, I am not too upset about this, as it gave my boi and myself the chance to see where the journey might go, but is it fair to intentionally set up disappointment and defeat by someone that ist just further down the skilltree? A player spoke up, she said "DM that is so mean, make your own damn character!" Should the DM be punished for stepping on my terrain, and on me, and on the group who got captured shortly after, or is this masterful set up for besting the guy later, I await your judgement excitedly, maybe too excitedly tbh.

Payt Suro

true. I still want to play dnd but that's a really good idea for her probably

Payt Suro

sorry if there are repeats, not sure if the comments are going through

Emily

To the most jolly and judicious judges and bumbling baby bailiff I present the case of the too expeditious retreat: I am a player in a long running Strixhaven campaign, where the DM and I have much more DnD experience than the rest of the party. The DM set up a pvp encounter meant to be a game of magical capture the flag, where the party was split into two teams playing against each other, with a promised boon for the winning team. In preparation for the game to begin I cast expeditious retreat on myself (shoutout Calder Killday) and on my first turn I used my action to dash and then used my bonus action dash from the spell. Because we were playing theatre of the mind, my DM declared that I was already within 10 feet of the other team’s flag. It was fairly easy for me to take the other team’s flag and start heading back on my next turn, this time with more opposition. Later in the encounter, one of the players on the opposing team was confused about how I had managed to move so quickly, and as the DM was explaining the mechanics, I realized she was mistaken about bonus action dash herself, and had been doubling my speed both for action dash and again for the bonus action, moving me 120 ft instead of 90ft. I’ll be honest, I’ve never been more tempted by the dice devil to let this go and win the game, but as a devout follower of Dice Christ I came clean, and explained the mistake. While the opposing team argued for a full retcon, the DM felt that was too complicated, and would basically mean replaying most of the encounter, as I had bonus action dashed three times at that point. I happened to be next in the initiative order and easily cleared the last 45 ft to win the game, and a token of good luck, with a +1 to all ability checks and saving throws to boot. The other team was understandably frustrated, with one player declaring that her character stormed off the field and refused to help us in the surprise combat that came immediately after. Judges, should I have been more clear about the mechanics and not assumed my DM knew how far I was moving? Should my DM have retconned the move and made me work harder for the victory? Or should the other players let go of an honest mistake? I humbly await your judgment.

Nathan L

What up Axford. Sup Murph. What’s cracking Tanner. Hi… Jake. I present to you The Great Wall of Force debate. One of my party members, a cleric, was restrained by a giant flying snake. She was extremely hurt and not looking good. I, a wizard, attempted to cast Wall of Force to separate her from the snake, describing the wall intersecting them both and choosing to push them to opposite sides of the wall to save the cleric, as the spell states I can choose which side of the wall a creature goes to. My DM said no, arguing the spell doesn’t allow the cleric to be magically untangled from the snake coiled around her and that the language of the spell doesn’t imply teleportation or forced separation. This sparked a lively debate at the table. Some of the party on the DM’s side, some on mine. Don’t worry it was all in good spirits, and I eventually conceded to keep the game moving. But, I still feel I was right and am seeking the highest court in the land’s opinion on the matter. Judges - how would you rule this? I await your succulent judgment. Bailiff - Fun bonus fact to reveal if the ruling goes my way: the first roll my DM made after his ruling was a nat 1, and he proceeded to roll a disproportionate amount of 1’s the remainder of the session. I believe Dice Christ was making it known whose side He was on.

Kiyahn Navissi

Dearest Jarf, of Jarf & Amir fame, as well as the others, I present to you the Changeling Cum Caper. During a trip through the Topanga Canyon Feywild in the fantasy LA home brew campaign i dm, my party was seduced by a group of changelings who all took the appearances of their ideal“types.” Our human paladin PC, Morningstar, is the kind of player who asks things like “can i roll to be good at sex,” and, after rolling very well, he decided to use an empty vial to store the changeling’s semen for safe keeping. Much later, as the party defended a dwarf queen from would-be assassins, Morningstar convinced the queen to imbibe the bubbling vial of changeling splooge in order to alter her appearance and escape Justices of the Crit, was I wrong to allow such shenaniganry in the campaign i spend 4 hours of prep time a week crafting, or was the Rule of Cool / Rule of Cum the best path forward? I await your judgement with bated breath.

Malachi Garr

To the most esteemed crit justices and the bailiff Drake, I bring to you the case of the Boobytrapped Basement: Awhile back, my husband DMed a circus-freak-themed Strahd campaign for me and a few friends. We had a great time, but my dagger-throwing human rogue nearly died an unfair death in Death House!! Our party survived the upper floors of death house (with a few close calls) only to find ourselves in the dark, culty basement below. My rogue made her way down a hallway only to fall straight into a spiky pit in the floor, nearly dying from the fall damage. My husband said I hadn't noticed the pit because I did not have darkvision. But, my rogue had a passive perception of 15, and the DC to spot the pit was 15. I thought I would be able to notice a shift in the air, slightly darker shadow on the ground, slope of the floor, or some other non-visual part of perception. Was I wrong to "blindly" trust my instincts in Death House, or was my near-death a pitfall of overlooked perception? I graciously await your verdict. PS, my rogue was named Bella Crowe, because in our session zero we did in-character Buzzfeed quizzes that said she was Bella Swan. I look forward to the next NADDPOD segment of character buzzfeed quizzes, right after the next episode of When Did That Come Out?.

MC

To the fair, resplendent justices and also J***, I present the case of the Husband Guy. A buddy and I have played in and DM’d various DND games together since high school, and last year he married an awesome guy and they’re very happy - his new husband even offered to run a full campaign for us and another friend, and we were pumped! We’re all having fun and get along well together, but the problem is that my buddy’s husband has started way overpowering my buddy’s character, a Paladin. He has already found ways to give him adamantine armor, the boots of speed, and a +3 sword of sharpness. We are level 2. He also has only had one of his monsters attack my buddy’s character in the last ten sessions, while my Bard gets his ass kicked regularly. Fair justices, I love my buddy and his husband and their marriage - but it’s starting to get demoralizing playing at the table, and the other PC wants to say something, but we don’t know if we should or not, and will defer to your opinion.

IncidentZen

To the Cardinals of our lord Dice Christ (yes, Jake, I know you haven't lost status in the church, yet...), I come to you today not with a confession, but to testify! I DM'd for the very first time this past weekend for my younger brother, sister, and mom, who came to visit on vacation. We had a great time! (Shout out to The Arcane Library for coming up with some excellent short adventures!). Despite listening to every D&D Court episode in the week leading up to the session, I made quite a few baby DM mistakes and did some terrible math, but I think Dice Christ must have forgiven me for those mistakes, considering the outcome. During the final battle, I swear to you, my "big bad" didn't roll in the double digits more than twice in 6 rounds, with multi-attack. This allowed my players to dispatch their minions and finally turn on the big bad, giving him the whomping of a lifetime. He was also turned into a Wererat thanks to some bites taken by a Wererat NPC that was assisting in the fight. My brother, who is quite introverted, even with his family, wasn't really sure if D&D was for him and was a bit gun-shy about the "role-play" aspect of the game, so I told him that he could play whatever type of character he wanted, which ultimately ended up being a mute mercenary (though not a lone wolf type, which was nice). After the session, he told me that he had a great time and actually opened up to me about something pretty personal to him for the first time since we were kids. I believe that I have Dice Christ to thank for this turn of events. And I also KNOW that I have all four of you to thank. NADDPOD was my first real exposure to D&D, and getting to hear all of you as new or at least fairly new DMs, making mistakes along the way, but still having a ton of fun and telling a great story, really showed me that I just needed to make sure that everyone had fun and everything else would fall into line. So, thank you, truly.

Grynk Grynkleton

Greetings to the charismatic justices Byron, Amalie, and Goblet, and a pitiful extension to that bailiff James. I bring forth the case of the forgotten comedy set. Early on in my most recent campaign in my improv excellency I mentioned off hand that an npc cleric performed comedy at the local piggly wiggly tavern and club on Thursdays. When pressed I then said Thursday was the next day. The party went about the quest given, rested and immediately speed ran the marketplace encounter I had to get to the piggly wiggly. To keep it brief the party met an npc who cursed the party and blew up said piggly wiggly and later on before the tavern was repaired I killed this npc in an effort to never do this comedy set. I ask am I wrong for not wanting to perform a live comedy set in character, am I wrong for not wanting to be embarrassed at the dnd table or do I owe my players a full stand up Hulu special? I await your judgement yours weirdly, Grynk

You Yee’d your last Haw

To the effulgent judges and the rowdy bailiff. May it please the court, I present the case of the invisible rogue. In my long time home game we came across an encampment of shadowfell monsters and since there was a lot of them I had the idea to cast greater invisibility on our tabaxi assassin rogue to gain the advantage. Then one of the other players casted haste on the rogue to double his action economy. Our issue was, after the rogue one shot killed the first enemy, he had enough movement to do the same to another monster. I argued that he should be able to use his ability to assassinate again because he was invisible and nobody saw the first kill. The DM argued that he shouldn’t be able to use the ability again because they would have been alerted of us after the first enemy event if the rogue sneak attacked. So I ask the judges, would an invisible, hasted, rogue be able to use assassinate twice?

Bakuraptor

To the Supreme Justices of the Crit and the rightfully demoted Bailiff Jonk, I ask for either your endorsement or your judgment: Am I wrong to threaten one of my PCs with sudden explosive diarrhea for refusing to roleplay his Nat 1s? I've been DMing for a group of five for a year and it's been great fun: my players are really invested and I've loved creating a world for us to tell their stories in. One thing I ask my players to do is to help me roleplay their nat 20s and nat 1s: I love hearing them explain how they succeeded wildly (or how they totally beefed it) and I think it helps us be more invested in our storytelling. However, one PC (a gloomstalker ranger) hates narrating his screw-ups: he'd always tell me to just say what happens (though he's more than happy to narrate his Nat 20s). Therefore, to help motivate my PC to lean into narrating Nat 1s, I came up with an innovative solution: if he refuses to narrate a Nat 1, I will now always say that the Nat 1 happens because his character suddenly and violently shits himself. I've only had to follow through on this threat twice so far - once in a tense negotiation and once when he failed a nature check (I said he felt nature's call far more strongly than he'd expected). My PC is now much more involved in our collaborative storytelling thanks to this threat, but I fear I have merely coerced his cooperation. Was I wrong to threaten him with involuntary incontinence? I humbly await your judgment.

Mister_Darkly

Honorable Judges and especially Jake (who I'm too soft to be mean too), I come to you a broken man. I've been running a monthly campaign for about a year. Most PCs are still on 2014 sheets but a few have switched to 2024. Last session, half the party was missing and the three brave souls who made it fought their first boss, a Mage. I figured, “Hey, let’s use the shiny new 2024 Monster Manual Mage statblock. What’s the worst that could happen?” I expected a tough but fair fight for my three experienced players. To everyone's surprise, mine especially, the Mage's Arcane Burst attacks and once-a-day Cone of Cold led to my first TPK in 8 years of DMing. I felt super guilty for dropping my heroes, so I ended the session saying they were knocked unconscious and taken prisoner. I'm hoping the missing players will be able to come next session to mount a rescue mission. Still, I feel so, so bad. After the session one player politely and constructively said the new Mage felt overpowered—specifically that Arcane Burst was “a lot”—which of course I interpreted as a personal criticism of my DMing and my quality as a friend and human being. I have been emotionally spiraling ever since and can't stand the idea that I made my players sad. Was I in the wrong for using the 2024 statblock as-is while some players were still 2014 and underpowered? Should I tone it down going forward? Or is this just how scary Mages are meant to be now? —A Soft DM Who Made One Bad Decision and Will Never Know Peace Again

RoleforThat

To the morally correct judges, and enlightened bailiff Jonk, Today, I present you with the case of the ruined pants. I ran a session where the PCs were ambushed by a group of assassins. The assassins were looking for something the party had, and so were trying to restrain them whenever possible. At one point in the fight, the bard of the group found themselves tied up and held hostage, as a way to leverage the rest of the party to surrender. On the bard’s turn, the player had the idea to pretend to die in the hopes that the assassin would walk away, which I admit is not a terrible plan. The part where I objected is that to sell it, the bard described falling to the ground and shitting their pants in order to prove that they well and truly died. I initially said no, but then the entire table yelled at me and basically bullied me into letting the bard make a performance check to convince the assassin that they had kicked the bucket. I set the DC at 25, and judges…..they passed. I then had to narrate their plan working and we moved on from there. But, to this day, I still feel like the plan was too cartoonish to work, even though all my players still swear up and down that it was an incredibly logical move. Judges, who was right in this situation, the scatalitious players or the uptight DM? I humbly await your verdict. P.S. The bard player in question was my then fiancé, and now wife.

Bri

If it pleases the court (and I guess the bailiff guy if he still has the job) I bring to you the case of the character who didn't have to be there. I DM for a new player and two people I've played with before. One of those players plays Lizzy the Wizzy, an awakened lizard familiar searching for his wizard. During the first battle I ran them through, Lizzy asked if he could throw off his clothes and pretend to be a normal lizard to avoid the fight. Stuff like this is normal for the player from the times we've played together so I laughed it off and agreed to allow it if Lizzy rolled well Judges, I was used to this player doing something like this as a one off because they did a similar joke in every campaign we've done together (once their character locked the rest of the party out of a safe room and live tweeted as we fought off zombies) but usually it only happens once. This campaign Lizzie would do anything to avoid solving puzzles or helping the party with NPCs (thankfully no other skipped battles but he wasn't helpful) until eventually he left due to outside issues Should I have allowed what I thought was going to be a one time bit? I happily await your ruling!

Gabagooblin

Forgive me, your honors, for I have sinned. I play a support class in a Curse of Strahd game with basically all new players. Ive run the campaign before so have enjoyed sitting back and just helping the group explore the game and occasionally explaining things on the side while the DM does their thing. In our last session, we all rolled like 100% Grade A Certified Dog Shit against a group of vampire spawn. I was struggling to keep people from going down, and we were all banking on our assassin rogue and his sneak attack damage. However, I realized about halfway through the combat that he had misread his assassin feature and thought it gave him advantage and auto-crits against anyone who hadn't taken a turn yet each round- basically, anyone who went after him in initiative. I knew it was wrong, but even rolling four times per turn he was barely hitting and so, in the interest of party morale, I said nothing. In the end we defeated the vampires and the rogue got in a cool finishing blow, but as my CCD teacher loved to remind us, a lie by omission is still a lie. Therefore I kneel before Dice Christ and his holy justiciers and beg for forgiveness.

Help_I_Can’t_Sleep

To the esteemed crit justice Emily, and the other three guys who are there, I present the case of the never ended dash encounter. I recently played in a play-by-post dnd game. Our DM was new to pbp games (the whole party was) so pacing was something they were still figuring out. Understandable. However, They kept us in non-stop encounters, no time to rest, no time to heal, nothing. That could be a fun concept for a high level party with lots of resources and ability to be creative with recharging. We were level 1. I, a Druid, was the ONLY healer in the whole party. And my two spell slots were gone after the first battle. Now All of this was tough, but NOT the worst part. The final encounter the DM put us in was running through a collapsing hallway. Essentially, taking dash actions, falling debris would hinder movement, etc. Which is a totally normal encounter for a regular table, might take some time at a table, but nothing egregious. This encounter took TWO WHOLE MONTHS. Two whole months of dash actions. Two whole months of dash actions and a dead party member. When we finally finished we assumed we would have time to rest, finally heal, get spells back, etc, only for the dm to immediately throw another fight at us. A few of us tried to politely hint to the dm how not fun the dash encounter was during those two months, but they kept going. Once they tried to launch us into more combat directly after we paused the game to talk to the dm and explain our frustration. This resulted in the dm leaving the group, and the game ending. I ask you, were we in the right to express these frustrations to the dm, or should we have given them the benefit of the doubt considering they were still figuring out pacing? (Note, we were very respectful in how we expressed said frustrations) I await your swift ruling, Wren The Druid who’s legs don’t work because they ran for too long (They/Them)

joe ventre

Honorable justices and also Jake who is also there I guess. I bring to you the twin counter-spell debacle. I have always enjoyed playing sorcerers because of all the ways you can use meta magic and a thought popped in my head. I asked several of my DM friends who then asked their DM friends. Can a sorcerer use twin spell for counter-spell? We went to the books but according to RAW we couldn’t find anything that would specifically prevent it. The only thing that we found was that twin spell cannot be used on the same target so you cannot counter-spell a counter-spell of a counter-spell. What I bring to you justices is can a sorcerer twin spell a counterspell and “call his shot” if there are multiple casters. In other words if caster A is casting a spell but you know caster B is probably going to pull some shenanigans on their turn/reaction can you target both? My friends and I had fun discussing this and (mostly) agreed “calling their shot” would be allowed as long as the sorcerer accepts that their meta-magic points would be used regardless of whether or not caster B actually casts a spell.

Nick M.

Hello Jovial Justices, and the “Joy Assassin” known as Jake. I bring you the case of The Paladin vs. The Homebrewed Curse.. Recently, while escaping a large Stone Keep, our party’s Paladin was hit with a homebrewed curse of blindness. We beheaded the Lord of the Keep, who cast the curse, before quickly making our escape. Afterwards, our DM described the homebrew curse as something that could not be cured by any conventional methods, such as greater restoration or remove curse. Rather, the only cure would be to have the original caster dispel it, or to wait for the curse to run its course, which the DM explained would be about 2 in-game weeks. Since we had already beheaded the original caster, waiting seemed to be our only option. Our Paladin was immediately and visually upset at this news. Sensing this, our DM compromised, stating that the curse will be lifted after 2 sessions (not including our current session), rather than having to wait 2 weeks since it is possible for several sessions to only span the course of a few in-game days. I personally found this to be a fair compromise, and could lend itself to some fun RP moments with our Paladin fumbling around and needing to rely on other abilities, or our party, in combat situations. However, upon hearing this compromise, our Paladin suggested we immediately make camp and just take long rests for 2 weeks. Sitting there… Doing nothing… The rest the party, myself included, vehemently opposed this idea since we all had individual goals, some of which would be ruined if we were to wait and do nothing for two in-game weeks. Our Paladin then countered by talking outside of the game, suggesting that we end the session then and there, and start a new one right away, which we could also then end quickly… all in one night. Effectively getting around the need to have the blindness effect for 2 real full-length sessions. Our DM eventually relented, saying the Paladin would only have the curse for the duration of our next session and no longer, rather than 2 sessions. Justices, is our Paladin being unreasonable by not adhering to our DMs home brew rule and trying to meta-game his way out of “playing the game”? Or does our Paladin have a point, and this home brew is just no good and that he should be allowed to adjust our sessions in order to get around being blind? My Party and I eagerly await your ruling….

Luke B

I have a confession for the honorable Church of Dice Christ and all of its devotees. And that other guy. I started Mysteries of Candlekeep with my younger brother and one of his friends a few weeks ago. Last week was our second session and we already had a TPK, which as a DM, I've never had before. Let me explain. My brother and his friend were trapped in a Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion spell. Searching for a way out, they met a few baddies along the way. They defeated these baddies without taking a single hit. Then they wandered into the armory. In this room was a dummy, a few weapons, and a magic broom sweeping around, minding its own business. I decided then and there, without looking at the broom's stat block, I would increase its HP. My greatest sin was not looking at the stat block. Dear arbiters, after both of my players' turns, the broom was already at half health. Then it was its turn, and I realized it had two attacks. I used one attack on each person, rolling the highest rolls I could on damage dice and knocking one player well bringing the other down to three HP. My alive player then attacks the broom bringing down to one HP where the broom knocked my final alive player and continues sweeping. For death saves, one player rolled three consecutive failures, while the other rolled two, then a natural 20, keeping him alive. I narrated him waking up and seeing his dead friend and a broken broom still sweeping on the other side of the room. My amazing players rolled with it, and I ended the session there. So, ask you all and Dice Christ, can I be forgiven for this sin? PS. I am a high schooler and my little brother and his friend are middle schoolers. They are amazing players and great at roleplaying. I've been catching up for three years and I'm finally caught up. Great to be with you guys!

John Mickle

To the esteemed and frankly, sexy, Justices. And Amir’s friend Ha-Eun. I present to you, The Optimization Debate. I have been playing in a casual, monthly “job board” style dnd game where our DM gives us short one shots to chose from for each session without an over arching story to the campaign. It’s a chance for us to play test characters, builds, and fun ideas. During a session I missed, our sorcerer deviated from the assigned quest and decided to start a fight club in the basement of a tavern. When the session was recapped to me, I jokingly told our sorcerer “oh my god. You’re a problem player.” We laughed before our DM sternly interrupted our laughter and said “no, he’s just playing the game. You want to do something different than I had planned? Great. I’ll work with that. The type of player I hate to have at my table are min-maxers. People who optimize their characters instead of just playing the game.” The table went uncomfortably silent as everyone slowly looked at me. Then it hit me. All at once. Over the past year I was the only spell caster who needed to worry about material components. Whenever I’d try to do something cool, it was bogged down by our DM looking up each nuance of my turn in the books. I was told I couldn’t have a familiar while our Half-Orc barbarian was allowed to start a throw rug based cult with dozens of followers. So Judges, my question is, what the fuck? Is min-maxing or optimizing characters really that egregious? Am I truly the problem player for wanting my cleric to feel cool while also trying to be the most effective and beneficial as possible for the party? I need new friends right? I humbly put myself at the mercy of the court and will accept your ruling and punishment so long it has been optimized for maximum damage.

Mayor of Clown Town

Justices of the court, i regret to say that today, I can’t regard you as honorable or any other colorful adjectives, as the subject matter at hand is too dire. In what may be unprecedented behavior in the court, my case today is not Player v. Player, DM v. Player, nor DM v. Trollwife. Today, justices of the court, my case is against you. (Pause for gasps) thats right! You! I’m suing you, defendants Murphy, Axford, Hurwitz and Tanner, for emotional damages due to social embarrassment. As a long time listener of the podcast & bonus content, i have a lot of NADDPod lore taking up space in my brain. I also have what could be described as an “Axfordian Memory”, so the things i latch onto arent always the most practical elements of what i hear or experience (i.e. i care about whimsy more than cold hard facts). The issue with this, of course, is that sometimes i say things in conversation that i cant necessarily back up with a full and proper history. This combination of truths about me led to the following experience: I was out to dinner with my boyfriends friends, who i dont know very well. We had just seen Mickey 17, and we were discussing the current popular trend of actors playing multiple roles in a film (sinners, alto knights, etc). I said something along the lines of “thats called klumping” only to be met with the response “oh i’ve never heard that, where does that come from?” Suddenly realizing that term was only in my brain from listening to this show, and having never heard it anywhere else, i quickly said i’m not actually sure, and tried to change the subject, flushed and embarrassed. Not even a month later, I was revisiting an old episode of the show because i was craving some ally beardsley content (as i am wont to do). It happened to be a d&d court episode where you bring up klumping, and then explain to justice beardsley that thats a term you guys use to describe when an actor plays multiple characters in a project, a la eddie murphy in the nutty professor II: the klumps. I was shocked. I was flooded with humiliation. I made a reference to a podcast that made up a word in reference to a movie i’ve never seen, as if it were some cool, obscure inside baseball term i had heard actors use. I’ve been sitting with this pit in my stomach ever since, wondering if they went on to look up the term only to find tumbleweeds rolling across their search results feed. Probably thinking i just made something up to sound smart. Probably thinking im a fool and a nonsense-peddler. For the humiliation and trauma of this journey i’ve gone on, i’m suing for either a season pass to the waterpark in gladeholm, one date with callie so i can show her how it feels to be seen, or an apology. I ask, how do you plead?

Ashen

To the honorable justices and I guess also Murph’s DMPC “Jaek.” I present to you the case of the Difficult Druid and the Bleeding Bard. I have been in a campaign for over three years with four level 7 PCs: a wizard, a monk, a druid, and me, a bard. We are all great friends and there is no bad blood here. Anyway, our dragonborn druid refuses to wild shape, and instead hangs back to use her acid breath or the spell Wind Wall. ONLY Wind Wall, every time. The DM home-brewed an ability for her to wild shape into a young dragon, which she has only used twice since getting it two years ago. As the only PC up in the mix, I get absolutely rocked. The wizard takes hits so I don’t have to, and the monk has stopped using evasion. To add insult to injury, we all watched the DND movie together and when the druid in the movie wild shaped, our druid said, “that’s so cool, I wish we had someone who can do that,” to which I responded, “you can turn into a fucking bear.” I prostrate myself before the court and ask if we should get over our tank not tanking or if we should trap our tank in a wild shape a la Tobias from Animorphs. P.S. don’t play, hate the show

Spencer Clark

To the regally-robed Referees and their banal Bailiff, I present to you the case of the Lost Faith. Our group is blessed with multiple DMs. One of whom, a self-described follower of Dice Christ, had some success at work in early 2022. He decided to reward himself by purchasing a high-priced DM screen/dice tower combo made of purpleheart hardwood. It was immaculate, and it rolled absolute garbage for him. Without exception over the last three years and across multiple campaigns, it rolled low for him and high for us. Obviously: we loved it. But, alas, we have been betrayed! We found out today that he shipped it back to the maker so they could "undo the curse" bestowed upon it. But Judges, the way it rolled was the will of Dice Christ! Perhaps the "curse" (as he calls it) was meant to teach our DM humility or self deference or to atone for past sins. Our role is not to discern the will of Dice Christ, but to respect it and through self-reflection find self-improvement. I ask you: was our DM wrong to forgo the faith and seek his own road to paradise? We faithful members of the group humbly await your wisdom.

Noah Kyle

!!UPDATE!! To the justices and the bailiff I bring to the court an update AND a new case, the case of my players v. the Supreme Crit The Recap: I am the starfinder DM with bad self-talk who took the mulligan on a soul projection prison break when my player’s questions made me realize I did not like this plot thread. You sentenced my players to have cat John Cena threaten their lives and then jizz in the back of their car (it was a weird episode) The Update: we have had the prison break since this case was submitted and it went exceedingly well. The prison played many cerebral tricks on my players and in the end they broke the backstory character out only for an assassin, who was assigned to kill the character if she ever got out, to kill the NPC, the player that knew her, and another PC who sacrificed themselves so the rest could escape. It was rad as hell and has started a super fun goth arc in our campaign we’re all very excited about. A New Case: I was extremely excited to share with my players that we had been featured on my favorite podcast; I have been listening since ~Ep 50 of C1 and have mentioned something from the show to one or more of my players at least once a week. I tell you this to tell you that I can not do that anymore because to my players NADDPOD’s name is mud. They were all some combination of incredulous or enraged at the Court’s ruling that they were “pedantic” and that you should not question the DM’s story for logic. They are especially mad at justice Murphy, who in the episode was staunchly against asking questions at the table, saying things about him like”fuck that guy”, “that question hating chode”, or, “Murph, that 5 foot 3 bitch”. Any mention of the show or their punishment has me taken to the razzberry patch, specifically because “we didn’t sue you” and how dare I submit a case to a court that must have someone punished? Justices, should I explode my players? They’re talking mad shit, and I have a lot of power as their PC’s God, so should I just wreck their shit? Or have I done my players wrong by misrepresenting them in the highest crit of the land?

Garrett Myers

To the bouncing baby kangaroo court (sans Caldwell and 2018 murph) and that low down dirty bastard of a bailiff Jarf I present the case: The Rule of Cool vs. The Rule as Written In my most recent session, the PCs were escaping from some local authorities after causing a stir. The party’s barbarian is wanted for serial murder in this: her hometown. As the group retreated to their gold scale drake mount through darkened Hobbiton-esque alleys, the cleric of the group reached their mount and mounted the highly cursed and recently upgraded laser turret attached to Pumpkin’s back. That’s the drake’s name, keep up. So the cleric says, “I want to provide covering fire.” I answered, “why and where?” He responded towards the village. I confirmed a couple more times that he wanted to fire a laser weapon towards a grouping of homes and he confirmed. I told him to, “roll high.” He rolled a 4. So I narrated that he missed the mark and destroyed a halfling house along with its rooftop gardens. Mind you, this cleric had already missed the mark earlier with a spell and taken out the side of another house during this escape. Justices here’s the meat: the barbarian was very upset at the cleric who was destroying her hometown, she declared that she wanted to, “knock him out” and rolled a Nat 20 with her rage advantage. I explained that unconscious was at zero hit points and she could roll her next attack to see if that was possible. The barbarian IRL got very upset. There were tears and she told me that I “stole her story moment.” I offered a narration of a grapple or a judo-throw, which the barbarian agreed to, sort of. It got pretty heated but I continued the game after asking the barbarian if she wanted to continue, however the she turned her shoulder to me and didn’t make eye contact for the rest of the session… The barbarian and I are friends outside the game and we’ve made up, albeit she maintains that I was wrong because they were at the end of their escape anyway… Justices: do you stand with rules or with cools? -The Cheeky DM

Panner_Samuel

How does the three amazing judges deal with a character that keeps killing off their characters in order to play new characters? I’ve made the first few work in the story but now I’m LOST! Also, I have two pc players that do NOT like eachother. Please gentle judges HELP

Bunny 🩷

To the esteemed bailiff Jape, and the highly justices, I submit the case of the BIRD CAFE. 🪿🦉🐓🦃🦩 As the DM, I planned a 1920s Chicago themed campaign for my party to play in, complete with a werewolf Al Capone, half-elf Moonshine Mary, Tommy guns, and all the glitz and glam of the Roaring 20s. I even had players rolling on the wild magic table when they had any type of alcoholic beverage, which was very fun! As we got into the third session of play, my characters came up with a bird themed cafe in the city where they wanted to make their meeting spot. I allowed it, but they turned their party-made cafe into one that was run BY the birds, complete with an ostrich waiter that run through the establishment at full speed with the orders. It was chaos and the whole table was dying with laughter. I loved the bit, but I was remiss that we spent so much time on it after I had spent so much effort planning the actual adventure the party was supposed to explore. In future sessions, do I let the table devolve into this level of silliness every time, or do I quell the mood to keep the party somewhat on the adventure path in the world I had planned for them?

WeedGoku69

To the magnanimous judges, the effervescent Axford and “jake”, I have recently been running a castlevania-inspired campaign in my homebrew setting for 4 friends, two of which had previously been dating until about 2 weeks ago who we will call sebastian and megan. sebastian has been a friend of mine for a few years, and brought megan to our table once rumblings of another campaign were made. He has been playing dnd for years while this was her first campaign, so I had decided to spend the first arc largely aiming to help her get a grasp of the system, the role play and the general vibe of the game. All was well with her character driving the story, having relevant npcs to talk to, while my other players mostly just enjoyed playing their new characters (one of which is a tall, mostly mute, shredded and oiled up goblin named Sex, btw), things were going very well and this seemed like it could be my first truly functional long term campaign, until disaster struck. Seb texted us letting us know they had split a mere few days before our 6th session, which i took in stride and chose to rewrite and retcon some of what we had planned, treating our previous sessions as almost a pilot for the campaign and allowed for any changes that players wanted to make (like sextus the goblin actually talking), and I was actually excited to invite another of our old friends to join the campaign at a good starting point for everyone. Then, about a week and a half later, we received another text from seb saying they were back together (mind you this is after them having 5 post-breakup chats, in which he expressed frustration at not being able to move on emotionally because of said chats). Im happy for my friend, but I have no idea what to do in this situation. Justices, do I return to the previous storyline we had been running, counting on their second try to hold water? Or do i continue with the retcon and deprioritize her character in terms of story driving power? I place the fate of my campaign fully in your capable hands (as long as jake used hand sanitizer first)

ScanmanRT

To the judges who rightfully condemned my DM to a life without liquids and the bailiff who messed up the paperwork. I present you another opportunity to bring justice upon my DM in the case of The Most Deadly Dodge. In the same campaign where my warlock was killed after slurping a god, another PC named Rebel was a war-forged eldritch knight fighter from a desert kingdom. After returning by himself to his homeland in order to find his creator, he eventually found his sort of Dad and had a heart to heart about his creation. Rebel had been struggling with the fact that he possessed an incredibly powerful magical hammer imbued with the spirit of an earth god but despite his best efforts, he couldn’t draw out the weapons magical power. We at some point learned that the hammer works similar to Thor’s hammer and will only lend its power to someone who it considers worthy or virtuous. After sometime the town came under attack by an evil wizard (my character’s brother). The wizard was able to take control of the minds of the other war-forged and had them attack the people of the town. Rebel sprung into action to defend the people of his homeland and eventually he is all that physically stood between a group of children and his mind controlled metal siblings with crossbows. With his shield raised, Rebel was prepared to defend these children with his life. The DM let the player know that the war-forged were about to open fire on him and in response the player said “I take the dodge action”. The DM then described how as the bolts fired towards Rebel he dodged out of the way at the last moment, allowing the bolts to fly past him and into the group of children killing them all. This lead to a morose end to the session and the hammer still not seeing Rebel as worthy. The player protested that he was just trying to take some kind of defensive maneuver in order to take less damage from the oncoming attacks. I ask you judges, was the DM right to interpret the players words literally? I throw my friends, and definitely not myself, at your mercy.

TeamLouie

To the Cutie Patootie Judges and the (adjective) Bailiff (name) I present you the case of the Dungeon master with a grudge? We had a DM take over the helm after the original DM said he wouldn’t have time to do it anymore. The campaign started off fairly interesting. Until things started getting tedious, like making us narrate turning a doorknob to open a door, or when we’d look behind a painting he’d say “you see a wall, a nail, a string”, or having to look in a specific direction or behind an object before making a perception check. Then he started picking off players with no agency. One player died because they were chasing something through the woods alone. No explanation. Then we got to “the house” We were in a house where every room had monsters, be it zombies, a mimic, sludge monsters, a book that possessed you, etc. We were in this house for 3 months of game time. Ten 4-hour sessions. He said it could be done in one session and we were just playing it wrong. When I called him out on this, he seemed to start targeting me. when we were investigating a bedroom, and my character stepped into the side bathroom, he pulled my character into a toilet occupied by a squid, and even though it was adjacent to the room the other characters were in, he said the other characters couldn’t hear my cries for help and started counting until they could hear me. It was 47 seconds. He made me play 7 turns of initiative where I was just getting crushed and eaten by a poop squid before my friends could come and help me. Needless to say I died. And then he would mock my character backstories, first for not being detailed enough, then for being too detailed, or giving him “nothing to go on”. Then he would outwardly say I would take too long on my turns, even making me move seats in my own house so I could sit next to a more experienced player “because I needed the help”, even though there were less experienced and slower players at the table. Full disclosure I had only been playing DND for about four or five months at this point and he knew this. Despite all this we had a pretty decent friendship outside of the table, at least I thought. We went to cons together, had dinners, he’d pay sometimes. It came to a head one movie night when he came to my house and sat in my usual seat, refused to move, and made me reach over him to grab my nightly medication that was on my side table. Then after the movie, he complimented my girlfriend’s new character backstory and said I should do what she does. When I told him that was the method I used he told me that I clearly wasn’t doing it right and I needed to do what she does. This is when I finally confronted him about everything and he acted innocent and shocked. “You think I’m picking on you?” He asked. And when I told him my reasons and all the comments he made, his response was “Well you can’t be good at everything. I’m not your babysitter.” That was when I decided I was gonna leave the campaign because other people were attached to their characters and I didn’t want to break up the table for my grievances. This upset everyone except the DM who happily proclaimed that D&D was now at his house. Other people asked for a resolution. I tried and he refused to budge. To my surprise, the table voted him out and we’ve been playing at my house with our original DM ever since, except for recently when I’ve been trying my hand at DMing. I ask you this. Should I have stuck it out or was I right to have tried to get out of that campaign? Did the DM seem to have it out for me or was that all in my head? I humbly await your judgment, and I’m ready to accept any punishment.

Grotesque Ghoul

Oh praise be Dice Christ and bless thee omnipresent priests and priestess and the 0.142% less omnipresent altar boy. I have a confession that has been weighing heavy on my soul for 3 years. When I played dnd with a group that were friends with my roommate at the time, who I moved in with because he and his boyfriend’s rent was raising so they needed one more person on the lease, I was an inexperienced player who only played video games and thus, warped my mind as to what a PC was. I was stricken with a horrible case of M.C.S, or Main Character Syndrome. I made my characters as holier than thou and always wanted to draw the attention onto my character because I thought they were the coolest and the most important and I definitely ruined campaigns and soured moods. I am no longer friends with my roommate or their group because they are genuinely horrible people and I haven’t played dnd since, but that doesn’t excuse my sins against Dice Christ and I pray that in all Their rolling benevolence I may be cleansed of my filth.

Matthew Sturm

To the honorable Justices and the lugubrious Bailiff, I present the case of the invincible rats. I played a swarmkeeper ranger in a level 15 one-shot, flavored after the pied pier with rats as my swarm. The one-shot concluded with a PVP contest where we were trying to get a gift card out of an indestructible barrel. I had found the barrel and was carrying it up a rope trick under one arm. At the end of my turn, I used my swarm to give me a flying speed in order to avoid falling, describing it as the rats grabbing the rope and creating a rat chain platform. One of the other players tried to frighten everyone in the area, and after everyone had rolled their saving throws, he said, “But what about the rats?” My brother, who was DMing, and I tried to explain that the rats were just a feature of my subclass and weren’t really separate entities, so they couldn’t be frightened. After some arguing from the player, he eventually moved on and we assumed that was the end of it. On the players next turn, he tried to attack the rats in an attempt to make me fall off the rope. We once again explained that they weren’t separate creatures and couldn’t be hurt. The other players tried got upset and shouted, “So you’re saying the rats are gods!” After a lot of laughing from everyone else at the table, we eventually got him to stop going after the rats and try something else, although he was still in a pissy mood for a while after that. I ask the court, were my brother and I correct that you can’t target a swarmkeeper’s swarm, or was our friend correct that we incorrectly made the rats gods?

Connor Pryor

May it please court justices Tanner, Murphy and Axford, dice Christ themself. Oh and our bailiff. I present the case of the knowingly false Nat 20. I am a high school teacher running a campaign for 5 freshmen boys. During a fight against their first BBEG, one of my players went down and had one death save fail. The situation was incredibly dire for the BBEG. He was desperate and was holding the unconscious body of my player hostage. It was my players turn with the BBEG ready to kill the player on the next turn, however my player is pledged to the time god. I let my player roll a religion check to pray to the time god to deceive the BBEG into thinking he was already dead, so the BBEG would drop him. I watched my player roll a 2, but he immediately jumped up and screamed that he got a natural 20. Since everyone got so hyped, I decided to let it slide and everyone was able to defeat the BBEG and come out alive. Was it wrong for me to let that slide? Or will dice Christ punish my player for lying, or me for allowing the lie? I await yours and dice Christ’s judgement and I am at the mercy of the court.

Guy

To the esteemed judges and the foul bailiff I bring you the case of the long line. My players were trying to get into a fancy bar. One of my players plays a fourteen year old boy who would not be allowed in. He suggested that he should be able to hide in the Bag of Holding, which only has ten minutes of air. I decided to have him roll a d20, with each number below ten being an extra minute, and each number above ten being a minute reduced. He rolled a three, meaning the line would be seventeen minutes and he would suffocate. He argued that he should be able to poke his head out, but I insisted that there was no way to do that without being noticed in the incredibly crowded line. Justices, he yelled at me and we were playing in a room at the library so we could have gotten kicked out. Justices, was I wrong that he would not be able to subtly poke his head out of the bag?

Matthew Sturm

To the honorable Justices and Bailiff Jape, I present the case of the barrel rider. I was playing in a one-shot that ended with a PVP competition to win entrance to Heaven+, a premium afterlife. We had to find an unbreakable barrel on an island full of barrels and grab the Heaven+ gift card out of it in order to win. After the barrel was found, I grabbed it and began climbing a rope trick with it under one arm. When I was one turn away from reaching the portal at the top, one of the other players attempted to misty step up to me. More specifically, he wanted to misty step onto the barrel, hoping that the extra weight would cause me to drop it. My brother, who was DMing, initially ruled that I would need to make a strength save to hold onto the barrel, and then the other player would make an acrobatics check to stay on the barrel if I held on successfully. After some further deliberation, he decided to reverse the order of the rolls, citing that the misty stepping player might just immediately fall off and make it easier for me to hold the barrel. He failed his check and fell off, which resulted in me having to hit a lower DC on my save due to only having to withstand the initial impact rather than having to hold a whole person’s weight continuously. I succeeded my save and was able to make it into the portal and pull up the rope on my next turn. The other player initially argued that he shouldn’t have needed to make a check to stay on the barrel because he teleported directly onto the barrel and that I was unable to move out of turn. My brother cited that he might fall due to the rope moving drastically at the fulcrum point of my grip, causing me and the barrel to tip because of the extra weight. The player then argued that my save shouldn’t have been easier even though he fell off, but was overruled due to the original justification for the lower DC. For the record, I rolled higher than the higher DC anyway, so the lower DC didn’t even matter. I’m glad things worked out for me, but did my brother make the correct rulings, or was the other player robbed of his cool moment?

Matthew Sturm

To the honorable Justices and that one guy who just keeps showing up, I present the case of the rope trick robbery. I was playing in a one-shot that ended with a PVP competition to win entrance to Heaven+, a premium afterlife. We had to find an unbreakable barrel on an island full of barrels and grab the Heaven+ gift card out of it in order to win. After the barrel was found, I grabbed it and climbed up a rope trick and pulled the rope up. It took 2 actions to open the barrel and then grab the gift card, so on the first turn I opened up the barrel and waited for the next round. One of the other players directed a kraken, which had followed us onto the island and had been attacking all of us, toward the area of the invisible portal in the sky in a last ditch effort to stop me. My brother, who was DMing, had the kraken use all of its movement to get directly under the portal, then said that it made a grapple attack with its tentacle through the portal, rolling to see whether it attacked me, another player that I had charmed, the open barrel, or just the air. I argued that it shouldn’t be able attack inside the portal because it wasn’t inside the portal and attacks can’t pass through rope tricks portal. He ruled that it could attack because he thought you would be able to punch someone through the portal even if you couldn’t shoot them. He rolled a 1 on a d100, which resulted in the barrel being grabbed and yanked out of the portal. I attempted to save my plan by saying that the gift card might fly out of the barrel when it was yanked. My brother agreed, but gave it better odds to come out outside of the portal than inside. The card ended up falling out outside of the portal, letting the next player in initiative walk up and easily grab the card to win. Did my brother make the correct ruling by allowing the kraken’s attack, or was I robbed of my well-planned victory?

Drew Faber

Salutations to the venerable justices and the tolerable bailiff Jay Kurwitz My D&D group has been playing in a very grim and nasty homebrew world where we have been presented with such choices as “align with the terrifying eldritch ‘Archspore’ who wants you to kill a team of 5 people in order to earn safe passage through very dangerous territory, or otherwise align with the 5 people and incur the Archspore’s wrath bc they’re colonialists who want to eradicate the myconid population”… we ended up killing the 5, even though they were described as barely adults and seemingly nice despite their faction’s apparent goals. This is just one mild example, our party has had to make some tough calls. In my mind my character leans toward “good” or “lawful” moreso than “evil/chaotic” but I’ve recently begun to give in to the selfish and violent tendencies of the party in order to not be the “stick in the mud”. The disagreement is this: when my DM presents these choices it always seems like the world we’re playing in is bad and everyone’s bad, and no matter who we align with they’re evil and selfish so we might as well align with the factions who will get us closer to our goals. But then our DM will make comments like “wow I didn’t think y’all would turn so evil” or even “I’m a little disappointed in [your character] for not saying something, he’s a cleric and this should’ve been against his moral code”. Am I wrong for giving in to my murderous party’s whims and leaving my moral compunctions behind, or is my DM wrong for not really giving us a “good/lawful” choice and then gaslighting us into feeling like we turned bad all by ourselves? I await the court’s wise judgment and am prepared to kill off this character if need be, because his moral compass has long since been discarded (and I kinda wanna roll up a gloomstalker ranger anyway)

Lauryn

To the honorable supreme crit - the comedic heavyweights Justice Assford, SurfNMurph, and Tanney…… and Baliff Jake. I bring you the case of falling damage in water and the water walking spell. Where this begins - My wonderful players had an epic battle against mechanical dragon. One player cast water walking on the entire team pre battle. During battle, another one of them decided to mount the dragon because they’re a melee fighter and naturally wanted to get up in the dragons business. Well, the dragon flung him off, and since the battle was on the coast of a lake, he asked if he could aim for the water, to which I (the DM) said sure - make me a Dex check. He succeeded and promptly landed in the water. I ruled that hitting water from 100+ ft would be equivalent to hitting land, but he argued since he had water walking, he should at least take half damage because the spell would attempt to keep him on the surface of the water. Reading the spell, it says “move across any liquid surface as if it were harmless ground”, so I ruled that landing on the water would react like landing on the ground. This player almost died from drowning (he was stunned) but ultimately ended up barely surviving. My table still argues that the water walking should’ve reduced the amount damage he took. Judges - please settle this one and for all.

Chaos Phoenix

Glorious and exalted Justices and that guy that's in an emotionally abusive polycule (or at least tries to be)! I would like a ruling on what I believe is a Wrongful Razzing. I am a DM for a group of friends, we've been playing a campaign for several years. On a recent adventure, the 5 level 14 PCs were exploring an abandoned temple full of traps and stone golems searching for a lost scripture. They had completed the adventure in dazzling style, disabling the traps, collecting protective charms to make the golems see them as allies, and collected the lost scripture from the great altar after defeating the final guardian! But there were many rooms unexplored so the party decided to keep searching, as they hadn't found much loot yet. It's important to remember that all of this was now completely optional. At the end of the session, at the end of a workday (like 9:15pm), they found a room with a puzzle in it, symbols oriented to point towards a button that would open a secret door. They found all the obvious clues I had left and once they realized it was a puzzle, I explained some of the mechanics to them. Since they were essentially free-exploring and had as much time as they wanted to solve the puzzle, I was lowering all of the DCs and hell, if they figured out the logic of it, they wouldn't even have to roll. They agreed but after 20 minutes or so hadn't solved it and started to get frustrated. Seeing tempers rising, I suggested we move on and could come back to this room fresh at the start of next session. The players agreed but after 5 minutes, one decided to go back to the room and try something (it didn't work), got very frustrated and declared she was checking the room inch by inch, rolling rapid fire Investigation Checks with a -1 modifier and never getting higher than a 10. When she demanded someone with a higher skill come back to do this, I said "It's not about rolling dice, you have to solve the puzzle." Shortly after we ended the session, and I felt like crap since everyone left either frustrated or defeated. Next session, they solved it within 10 minutes and got their desired loot. But since then, this player has said "It's not about rolling dice" several times when asked to roll, particularly if she fails it. This player is a very dear friend of over 15 years, razzing and sarcasm is our love language and I'm sure she says it to be funny, but this one gets to me. I put a lot of love into DMing, and it sucks to end a session with everyone frustrated so this moment has stuck with me and I've been doubting myself. I humbly ask for your ruling: Was I in the right to say that dice can't solve a puzzle, or do I deserve my beloved friend's roll-razzing?

christopher belisle

To the venerable DM's of the court and the baliff who can really take a beating, Jake, I bring you the case of the wrongfully poisoned potion. May it please the court, during the course of my parties adventure through a tower that led to the BBEG, we found a vending machine that had potions that did various homebrew effects. Examples being a potion that granted a +2 bonus to AC against plants, a potion that cleared you of all current potion effects on you (some of the other potion effects weren't great), and an improved health potion, 6d6+6, that had a 5% chance to poison you, specifically rolling a nat 1. During our final battle with said BBEG, I was low health and need to take a potion to not die. While I was rolling out my hit die, our halfling fighter brought up that since he was lucky, should he be able to reroll the nat 1 on the poisoned health potions since he was lucky? The DM said that that was a little too broken because he would probably never be poisoned so he decided to change the ruling so that you got poisoned on a 2 instead of a 1 as I was rolling the dice to see if i would be poisoned or not. Justices, I could not believe the number that had showed up on that dice. For it was in fact, a shout out to the 2 crew. The DM ruled that I was still indeed poisoned despite having just arbitrarily changed the number so that our halfling could be poisoned. So I ask you, do I have a right to be a little peeved at this ruling? P.S. We never fought any plants monsters P.P.S. I've included the link to the potion effects https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xkRn_WRPSHtcq_nGhwNKQ6Vw0mBfm_lHRVhinFD4aMc/edit?usp=drivesdk

ShrimplyAwesome

Dear most honorable Justices and bailiff Jorkinit I think? I bring you the case of the Hijacked Heartfelt Gesture. I’m in a home game with my now fiancée Rowan and “Sarah” whose wife “Syd” DM’s for all of us. Currently we’re on a mission to depose an evil king that my character helped put in power during his backstory. Our last session ended with us discovering a rebel camp and deciding to spend a couple days with them to plan before continuing our journey to the capital. Towards the end of that session I privately asked the DM if the camp blacksmith could make a dagger from a crystal my fiancées character liked and some brass knuckles made from a rare ore we found, for my character to give my fiancée and Sarah’s characters respectively, to which the DM said yes. Now Justices, all I expected was for these weapons to be cute little mementos that represented our journey thus far, as both Sarah and my fiancée play spell casters and don’t really use melee weapons much. So imagine my surprise when the next session roles around and the dagger I had made turns out to be a +1 viscous dagger. Sounds great right? Well it would if not for the fact that right after my fiancée got her dagger, Sarah gets her brass knuckles along with a two page description detailing all the magical stuff and extra damage they can do. Justices am I in the wrong for feeling like there’s some preferential treatment going on or should I just be happy that one of the little trinkets I had made could potentially one-shot the BBEG? P.S. My fiancée plays a sorcerer and Sarah plays a Druid and the Brass knuckles were completely home-brewed as far as I can tell.

okiedokeTM

To the Honorable Judges and Jeff (if they still keep you around), I present the case of the friendly-fire werebear. When my table started a new campaign, I, previously the forever-DM, was excited to make a player character for the first time. Perhaps too excited. I made a werebear gnome who was turned in a traumatic way, so whenever she took slashing damage she needed to make a (low DC) CON save or turn into a feral werebear that attacks indiscriminately. My DM and I worked this out gleefully, thinking it’d be a cool arc for her to learn to control it with the party’s help. Around the third combat, she transformed for the first time and attacked a party member after the battle, then got knocked out quickly. After the session, one of the other players kindly but firmly told us that it’ll be stressful to have to worry about the aftermath of every battle where we fight someone with swords, and that she really doesn’t want *her* character to turn into a werebear. My DM-senses suddenly returned to me, and I realized I got lost in the sauce with this one. I apologized, but I think our current DM was embarrassed for letting this happen… Judges, as the more experienced DM who should’ve known better, I will take any punishment you give me. But please, how can I balance this character so that I still have a traumatized werebear gnome without leaving the other players traumatized too? I humbly await your judgement.

Steven W.

To the undefinable Supreme Crit Justices and the guy who, let's be honest, you only keep around so we can make cheap jokes about a cheap man. I think his name is Jeremy? I bring to you the case of Bart Simpson, the world's most hated NPC. I was DMing a campaign and the PCs were traveling to the Abyss to meet with a succubus warlord. During the meeting, I briefly introduced the warlord's bodyguards, which included a wispling (half gnome/half demon). I described him as “pacing back and forth behind the warlord, with his hands resting on hand axes strapped to his side” and “he has short and spiky hair. Kind of like Bart Simpson.” I got some light razzing for this description, but nothing else was said about him. The meeting with the warlord went well and the PCs were offered to stay the night as guests. That evening, the bodyguard was sent to deliver a message to the PCs. As soon as their room door was opened, the party fighter attacked the wispling, followed immediately by the party sorcerer plane-shifting him to their god's home plane, where the demon would be hunted for sport. Despite having never spoken a word to them, my PCs had unanimously decided to kill the bodyguard. After the session I asked how they came to their decision. One player said, “I knew he was going to die the moment you described him pacing with his hands on his axes.” Two others said it was when I compared him to Bart Simpson. Regardless, they all claim that their actions were justified. The bodyguard was supposed to back stab the party during a climactic fight, so it worked out that they just dealt with him before hand, but I ask you: Were my players wrong to kill my NPC before he technically did anything wrong, or are they just masters at sniffing out a traitorous Bart Simp-- I mean demon?

Flying Mongeese

To the Supreme Crit Justices and the Backup Bailiff Jake, I bring you the case of the Not-So-Greasy Spider. I played in a one-shot where we were Goblins thrown into a Murder Mansion by our Overlord as a test run. We were told beforehand that we would die in this one-shot. I built my character as a full-support Artificer who would just buff and debuff the battlefield. We got through the mansion surprisingly well and made it to the final boss: a giant, 4-legged spider. I decided to cast grease to slip up this arachnid, but I was told that it would not work since the spider was too big and only two legs would be in the grease. There was no roll and I just decided to not use the spell. Justices, was this right? I get it was supposed to be difficult, but my spell not working seemed unfair. Please deliver swift and virtuous judgement. PS to sway the court in my favor, the DM also took away another player’s Crit because he wanted to keep the one-shot difficult. Just for your humble consideration.

Ally

Dear justices and Dice Christ I fear I have strayed into the lands of goof and away from the road of rationality. My crime, my sin, the red in the ledger of my DMing life is called Bodega Simulator. After wrapping our first multi campaign the group I DM for we decided for the next campaign we wanted to play through the character's backstories before they set out on their adventures at level 1 in 5e. To do this we've been using the system kids on bikes. The intention was to see the highs and lows of these characters growing up in a small spooky town together. However due to the fantasy band Copperback needing an opening act, a great roll for a signing bonus after the gig, and a lucky gambling streak at an underground boxing match, the party have pooled all their funds and bought the 'fantasy' bodega across from their school. Everything has become about the bodega. They finish school and go straight to the bodega, they employed their school friends at the bodega, they host gigs at the bodega, if they find out a clue about a monster or mystery they regroup at the bodega. There's even a Excel sheet for the bodega's finances. We've hombrewed more rules for the bodega's mechanics than there are in entirety of kids on bikes. The party now refer to the game as bodega simulator. I fear my desire to follow the fun the party is having with this will negatively affect the characters they had been developing. The necromancer witch, dumpster thief, silver tongued guitarist, and bear knuckle boxer have all taken a wild left turn into bodega owners/employees.

Jakey Juice

Good morning great and powerful judges and the four legged man Jake. I set before you the case of the bullied smoker. In a rare turn my dnd crew decided to play a module of Lost mines of Phandelver. I decided to not play a human fighter for a change and made a fairy Cleric, he was a disgraced gambling man and all he had to him was his infinite cigarette. And the first combat the dm had a goblin throw a net over me andyhe whole gaggle of goblins stabbed my cleric to death. Fully failing his death saves he was gone. But in my last triumph i rolled a slight of tongue check to swallow his cigarette. Was that wrong? Shoud i have let the other players take his only possession? Or was i right to fight back against the tyranny of the module?

elizabeth

To the beautiful, magnanimous justices, may it please the court. I was playing in a campaign with a group of friends about a year ago. Around six or seven sessions in, the DM said, "I don't really like running combat, so this is going to be a more roleplay focused campaign from here on out if that's okay with all of you." Three of the five PCs were happy about this, as they prefer the roleplay part of the game; myself (a ranger) and one of my other friends (a fighter) were a little disappointed. I was fine to go along because I was a beast master ranger and my animal companion (a hawk named Barley) gave me plenty roleplay opportunities. My other friend, however, was a champion fighter. She asked if she could switch classes to something with more options for roleplay, since her entire character/all subclass abilities were built around combat, but the DM said no. The DM justified this by saying that we had already played enough sessions that it would be weird to change it when her champion subclass abilities had already come up multiple times. The campaign disbanded a few months later (no other combat encounters were run) due to other issues*, but I still feel my friend was wronged and should've been allowed to switch classes to something that had more utility outside of combat once the DM decided to make the campaign more roleplay heavy. Was the DM justified in telling my friend to stay a champion fighter despite not running combat, or am I correct in thinking this was a weird move that just served to decrease my friend's enjoyment of the remainder of the campaign? *In case the court is interested in the drama, two of the PCs who were dating in real life had also made their characters romance each other in a way that was (kudos to our DM) very interwoven with the plot of the campaign. They broke up, didn't want to keep playing romance, and the campaign kind of fell apart around that.

JesterTheCleric

To the Deacons of Dice Christ I come before you with a humble confession of the first and only time I have lied about a roll as a player. I was in my second game as a player (I had DMed for a couple years before that). I was playing a human gunslinger sharpshooter named Matthew Beren. He went on a few adventures and during one, we fought a gang of were-creatures, one of whom was a werebear. The werebear bit Matt, and I had to roll to avoid contracting lycanthropy. Deacons, I desperately wanted to be a bear with a gun. I rolled high, over a 17, but I lied and said I rolled low, like a 3 or a 4, just low enough to still fail the save with my high constitution. Matt became a werebear (modified slightly to not give me so many resistances in bear form which were over powered), and had the campaign continued, would have needed to do a whole character arc to learn to control my werebear form. Alas, that did not happen, as the campaign fizzled due to scheduling conflicts. I loved playing my bear with a gun, but I know it was undeserved. I present myself to you, Deacons of Dice Christ, to purge me of my sin.

Robert Stegmann

To the cromulent Justices, Brian "Murph" Murphy, Emily "Wife Worm" Axford, Caldwell "Flip a DVD" Tanner and the unsung Baliff, Jake "The Cake" Hurwitz, I present the case of the Slime of the Century. This happened nearly nine years ago, but I am still a bit salty. My older brother was DMing for me and my friends in 9th grade, and we were all very new to the game. Our party consisted of my generic human rogue, a dragonborn sorcerer, a paladin based on DJ Khaled, and Shrek, a half-orc barbarian flavoured as an ogre. In our 3rd session, we were tasked with escorting the seven dwarves on a mining trip where we encountered two gelatinous cubes. Things quickly went south. I found myself with the rest of the party stuck in a cube and several dwarves dead. Our DM told us that we could try to succeed a skill check before an attack to do double damage. Desperate, I got the remaining dwarves to form a ramp so I could do an acrobatics check over the cube to do extra damage. I failed, and fell in. My dumbassery ended up having one of the party members being spit out, which resulted in the rest of my party surviving but my character being quickly dissolved. After the session, I looked up the stat block for gelatinous cubes and found they had a challenge rating of 2, making this was a very deadly encounter. I felt that this lead to PC dying unfairly. I questioned my brother about why he made the encounter so deadly and he said that because the cubes are so slow, he expected us to attack with ranged attacks and keep out of the cubes range. He pointed out that he showed us the stat block when our sorcerer rolled a Nat 20 looking for a weak point on the cube and that we had the dwarves continue to mine instead of fighting (even though they had commoner stats). Was I right to be upset at my brother for giving us such a deadly encounter, or was my PC's death the fault of our lack of strategy and my dumbassery? I await your righteous judgment.

andrea oaks

Greetings Justices and uh hi the bailiff i guess, A few years ago I was playing in a campaign and we had angered the large pileated woodpecker bird god and were all preparing to go into battle. Our DM told us that is was going to be an insane fight because “this is a literal god and you guys are level 5.” The entire party took this very seriously prepping spells and armor and making plans with one glaring exception. Our druid who based her character on her dog and decided to not learn her spells because “her dog doesn’t know spells.” This drove the rest of the party insane because just because your character is named after a dog does not mean you shouldn’t know your spells. We ended up winning the battle due to divine intervention, but were we right to be annoyed our druid refused to learn spells, or should we accept that a dog really wouldn’t know spells and thus it was fine to not prepare. Thanks in advance for your definitive ruling!

CommonCatepillat

To the Golden Gods of the highest council, thy kingdom come, thy crits be done, and (50/50 chance here so I'll say) Amir. I come to you with a cold case from my youth. THE CASE OF THE PRIMATE V SPIDER At age 13, I asked to be in my brother in law's tabletop game with two other (adult) players. It was a magitech setting where our characters were recruited to be apart of a magical syndacit of people who stop evil. My character, Snap Clackers, was a Nature powered monkey who gained his abilities and sentience after being captured and experimented on. Me and the other players got along and played well off of each other and it was shaping up to be a fun campaign. At the end of one of our sessions, the DM (Brother in law) announced excitedly that there would be a guest who would play a villain next session which excited the rest of the table as well. However, me being 13 and getting shit grades on my report card, I was grounded that week and couldn't go to the session. The next session I was filled in by the DM what happened. Apparently, the guest played an evil spider queen who womped the party and demanded they bring her 100 slaves for her to do with as she pleased and they agreed. My character, who was present while I the player was not, was made to agree with them. You can see how this would be of big conflict to who my character was and, being new to roleplay, I simply played him dispondant and angry for the rest of the session, going against what the party was trying to do that session. The campaign shortly fizzled out due to other factors outside of anyone's control. Judges, should I have been more malleable with my marcupuals morals or was I right to lash out at my party for their decision? (PS. The spider queen session was the 4th session) (PPS. The guest who played the spider queen was my 23 year old sibling. The one who was married to my brother in-law)

Binky Fiasco #1 Fan

To the exalted judges, and their loyal and widely respected bailiff Cake I have been a member of a dnd group for over four years, spanning multiple campaigns with rotating DM's from our group. Our most recent DM has been running a campaign for over two years, building on extensive lore and the world we created, with the games being hosted at his apartment. However, our DM began dating a player at our table several months ago, which was a shock to the rest of us, as we would have not suspected they would be a good couple. Over time, the DM worked with their girlfriend to revamp their character's backstory, making them the central focus of the current story. As time went on, we noticed tension growing between them, with the girlfriend intentionally pushing the DM's buttons, and the DM getting visibly aggravated with their girlfriends in-game shenanigans, which included asking if their stinky farts delt poison damage to enemies. A few days after a particularly tense session which ended on a cliffhanger, with us at the precipice of finishing a long quest and about to face off against an ancient dragon, we received word that the DM and the player had broken up with a lot of drama. This schism marked the end of our dnd group, as the DM needed time away and their now ex girlfriend was the driving character of the story. Judges, am I wrong to think that the DM should have waited to break up with his girlfriend until after finishing the campaign, or at least until after resolving the cliffhanger he left us on? I humbly await your judgement.

Will the Wraith Dad

To the most honored and honorable judges in all the land, and also that dude who opens the doors and stuff, I bring you the case of the Plotted Princess Power... Perhaps? essentially, I am dming a game with some of my friends in which one of my players is playing a young maid monk named holly... except she has a secret. she's actually a (homebrewed) revenent of the late princess lillian, who was once heir to the country and was assasinated several hundred years ago because she was trying to sabatogue peace talks between two other countries she was meant to be mediating. as she was dying, she was given an offer by magical force to one day have the chance to reclaim her throne, which she took. holly, the character, does not know that she is the revenent of the dead princess, just that she is undead. however, there is a high ranking paladin of the court who knows and intends to bring lillian out and back in control of holly and her shared body so she can reclaim her throne during an annual ball the current rulers are putting on- inspired by the fall of galaderon, actually. here's where the problem comes in- holly's player and i had a conversation about how if/when lillian comes out, she will be given to me as an NPC (and probably become the BBEG), and made a back up character who i have already dangled as a plot thread in front of a different player, so going to her is likely to be the next arc. however, after i had done that, holly's player mentioned to me that he wanted there to be a chance holly could still walk away from this, which is a very reasonable ask, of course, so ive tried to incorperate that into the planned combat of basically giving holly death saves to fight against lillian's rising. that being said, if lillian doesn't come out, my group will have thwarted the rise of my BBEG *twice* now, and i have no idea where to try to come in with a third potential BBEG that will connect with the overall story. judges, i am on my hands and knees, ashamed to even ask this, but should i try to rig lillian's acension so that my player feels like there was a fair chance but there really wasn't? or do i leave it up to dice christ and potentially shoot myself in the foot (again)?

hannah

good morrow sweet and beautiful justices, and heyyyy babygirl jonk. one of my players hates every important NPC i make. the very few she doesn’t hate (random men NPCs) she flirts with and tries to seduce. every. single. one. but i’m sick of it! I make every NPC reject her. this player also runs away from combat every chance she can and leaves her fellow players to fight alone. she hardly ever engages in the story that i make and complains about everything. am i in the wrong here?

Kyra Paige

To the wonderful and supreme crit justices and... Jake. I bring to you an age old question, how do you tell someone that they are not great at d&d? To explain I DM a group of 3 and one is so into the story and their character and is so full of excitement for d&d. I love that about them but the problem is they reject every and all plot hooks I dangle their way. Just ran away from pirates? A helpful NPC sends a letter offering aid! She says she doesn't trust the NPC and rejects it. Stuck in a room? An ancient scroll tells them a hint - she believes it to be trickery and so they don't take the bait. Literally EVERY plot hook I have put forward she finds a way to dispute it. And the problem is I don't think she even knows they are plot hooks.

Tada Mouse

Greetings just and jovial judges and that one brooding bailiff. Today I bring you the case of the TPK Tantrum. I have been DMing a campaign for my longtime friends for over 4 years now. We recently had a near TPK where they lost a battle to a Lich dictator (named Irik Von Evyl Dik). There was one survivor. The next session I set up a skill challenge where the survivor needed to escape the city; however the survivor ended up failing resulting in his death bringing about our first TPK. Most of the players thought everything was fair; however, the sole survivor of the initial fight complained the fight was too hard and that I was being mean to his character. I disagree. I had been hinting that the fight was going to be difficult and even told them the CR beforehand. I told the player the skill challenge was a life or death situation. My question to you, was I fair as a DM using a skill challenge to bring about a character death or was I just being an Evyl Dik? P.S. Everyone is having a great time and their new characters are truly unhinged.

Jacob Penny

Hello judges of both the law of RAW, and the rule of cool. And Jack. I come to you today with a case of robbed rad-ness. Recently, my warlock/artificer half-metal cowboy and the rest of our level 8 party were celebrating at a festival. A summer solstice celebration took place as the snowy effects of an adult white dragon made the town eternally covered in ice and snow. As the rest of the party finished winning their games, I took it upon myself to go speak with the leader of the town, who was sitting atop a cliff that overlooked the festivities. After a tense conversation, using Disguise Self to make my duster billow in the wind, the leader told me that he did not want the dragon gone, as it had become a tradition to give tithes to the dragon, and it kept the townspeople’s greed in check. As my character and I are grubby treasure goblins, we couldn’t let that mountain of a horde go to waste. As I gave my final monologue, I stepped closer to the edge of the cliff and spoke of my party’s strength. Metal covered my body, and I jumped off the cliff. Now, since my DM is super cool, we all got to choose from the post-game boons at level 8 that he approved, and I had kept mine a secret from the party for a month. I was describing how after I hit the ground, the ice shattered below me, and I took no damage due to my Boon of Invincibility, the DM jokingly said before I could finish, “So you die lol.” I didn’t actually die, but it turned into a small joke rather than a sick moment. So, while I still love my DM, I humbly request that the court decide whether my rad-ness was robbed, or if I was being too over-the-top cool. PS - If it scores me points, my artificer cannon is also my metal snake companion, Slang.

Dench Judy

P.S I sent in a case a while ago that you passed judgement on, about the friend who kept coming back and forth to home games after moving, with insane characters, you sentenced us to have a chat. Well.. we did … and now we’re best of friends! He is now running an Obojima (Studio Ghibli D&D Setting) campaign for me and some others where I play a little cat petal Druid called Bud, inspired by my cats, Honey and Bun ❤️ thought Emily might appreciate that little tidbit 😂 Thank you justices!

Gold Pony Boy

To the hotties with the bodies and that guy Jort standing outside shouting "this podcast would be nothing without Skaldova." I bring to you the case of "Pouring One Out for the Homies." When I first gained interest in D&D some years ago after listening to campaign 1 of NADDPOD, I decided to try joining an online group and actually play for the first time. During session 0, the DM claimed he wanted a "lighthearted and fun campaign" in the high-fantasy homebrew world he'd created. Cut to the first session - we're in the starting tavern, and after approaching the bartender, had my bard say he doesn't drink and asked if they had any chocolate milk instead. The DM angrily scoffed at me, saying "chocolate is obviously too rare and expensive during this time period" and that I, nor the bartender, would even know what chocolate even is. I shrugged it off and just took the ale. Later, we're talking to an NPC who mentions they recently lost some party members in a skirmish. In an act of respect, my bard spilled some ale onto the ground "for the fallen homies." My character was immediately accosted by guards, as the bartender chastised me for "being disruptive" and kicked me out of the tavern, with no rolls or checks to try and calm the situation, preventing me from interacting with any of the NPCs or quest information inside. When I questioned this, the DM said that I wasn't reapecting the game or his world and that this would be the consequence. Naturally, I did not come back for session 2. I have since found wonderful local friends that I've played home games with for multiple years, but judges, I still ask: Was I being disrespectful or naive as a baby player in this DM's homebrew world? Or is it okay to initiate some joke moments occasionally as a player? P.S. In all seriousness Jake, Skaldova was fantastic and even got my knows-nothing-about-DnD girlfriend into actual-plays for the first time. We loved the Carnal Crew.

Gabe Leonard

To the mirificent justices and the greatest/worst bailiff in the judicial system, depending on how we're feeling about him today: I bring you the case of the extremely convenient disintegrates. I play a bard in a long-running campaign with some good friends. As one of my magical secrets, I took Wall of Force. For a few sessions, I had a great time putting enemies in boxes and making them sit in time-out until we were ready to deal with them. However, after a few sessions I began to notice something strange: Every monster that could not teleport suddenly had the ability to cast Disintegrate, sometimes multiple times per battle. Coincidentally, Disintegrate just so happens to be the only spell that can destroy a Wall of Force. I understand that Wall of Force can be a difficult spell for DMs to play around, but I asked my DM before taking this spell and made sure that he was okay with the effect it would have on combats. Is it right for my DM to simply give all our enemies access to Disintegrate, or should I disintegrate my misgivings instead? I humbly await your judgement.

Mary Blackford

Ritual initial greetings to the most wise and visionary Supreme Crit Justices. I hope this case has not exceeded the statute of DM gripe limitations. At an introductory DnD game over a year ago, our DM, a player and DM with decades of experience (allegedlys), had a thing for a player of the female persuasion, who was there with her significant other and who played a high elf bard. In the middle of our third game, the DM introduced us all to the concept of long and short, rests. The high elf needed only four hours of rest, so while we were “resting,” he proceeded to flirt with said elf while the rest of us sat there for 30 minutes. I was there with my husband and daughter (also a DM), who was excited to see us learn how to play. The DM also mocked us newbies for offenses as minor as writing our name in the wrong place on our character sheets, mocking my husband for selecting a hand axe instead of a great ax for a battle, and argued with my DM daughter, about a very clear rule of game play (she showed him the players handbook), yet he persisted to ignore the rule. He then ended our sixth and last session by simply ending off, telling us that we should’ve gone after the giraffe he mentioned in the first session, rather than going into town to a tavern, and going on the lame adventure we just had. He ended off the sixth the session with PC stories unfinished, and finally, ended off gameplay an hour early and left with the high elf and her significant other. In all fairness, let it also be said that my husband and daughter and I still happily play dungeons and dragons together to this day, sometimes with others in new groups we have found. I beg your justices to tell us, what is a fitting punishment for this dodo bird of a DM?

Bryant

To the most erudite Justices of the Crit and their shockingly literate bailiff, I’m unsure if this is a case for the Crit, a confession, or a case for the brilliantly original segment “Murph I Were You”, so I’ll give you the details and accept whatever punishment, absolution, or advice you see fit. I’ve been married to my husband Hayden for four years and he’s my favorite person in the world. He’s perfect, with one glaring flaw: he has zero interest in DnD. He’s not against it, he just doesn’t get it and “would rather like go climb a tree or something”. The problem is that I can think of nobody I’d rather take with me to a NaddPod live show. The first time (Nashville) was easy. That was our hometown, so I just told him I had tickets to something with no further details. He was a trouper and even found things to like about the show, saying “I thought it was funny how obsessed they were with Diesel jeans and I liked the robot voice”. Our second NaddPod show (DC) was harder. After I bought tickets I convinced him to get on a plane to “meet our newborn godson (who is adorable and lives in the area)”. Once we were there I mentioned that by the way I’d grabbed tickets to a show with Murph and Emily. He was suspicious and asked me if “they’re talking about ‘Hey U Up?’ (Our favorite road trip audio book) or playing DnD with ‘Campbell and the Jock-y one?” I assured them nobody would be playing DnD, not lying because it was Dungeon Court. Now is where I need some sort of help from you, esteemed Justices and America’s third favorite Motorguycle: is it wrong to continue tricking my husband into attending NaddPod shows in the hopes of eventually breaking his will and getting him to roll dice with me? Also how can I deceive him in the future because he’s become VERY suspicious. Humbly, with love and reverence for most of you, Bryant

Chaotic Burrito

To the gleaming beacons of justice Axford, Murphy and Tanner, as well as the baby baliff who may be into Cake at this point. I present to you the case of the frog who defied death. I bring you back to the year 2020, I was Dming a cross dimensional campaign online with some friends that included a castle siege, a floating city in the sky and a time/dimensional teleport to the old west. This campaign was fairly silly, but mostly stayed on the tracks, but I still wonder if I handled the following situation correctly. One of my players was playing a Barbarian Grung and had been slightly unhinged up until the teleportation to the old west. When they arrived they encountered the horsemen of the apolocolypse who were supposed to be the BBEGs for the rest of the campaign, the players were only level 8 and were illequipped to fight these foes, but the Grung (Slippy) insisted, after 3 rounds of grueling combat, they were all on deaths door and the horseman of death was ready to deal the final blow, I rolled an attack and slightly fudged the number to avoid killing slippy and keep the campaign going with PCs that all my players had grown fond of. Death instead made them a deal for their lives and they went on to fight the cowboy magician and we all had a great campaign. My question is this, should I have just let them be tpk'd and reroll characters to stay true to the moniker of death? Or was this the right move? I humbly await your judgement.

Sarah M

Dearest and most esteemed Justices of the Court, and the most tolerant Bailiff Jake. I bring you the Case of the Waterlogged Upgrades. A couple of years ago, my partner and I joined into the last few months of a multi-year campaign. A little while in, we levelled up to 17 and got some new gear. My partner, for his fighter-sorcerer (don't ask), got some heavy armour, and I took the mobility feat for my monk. One session later, we enter a set of underwater caverns, where it seemed like we would be spending several sessions. It was at that moment that our strictly RAW DM introduced homebrew water rules. This included that heavy armour reduced you to half your walking speed, regardless of whether you had a swim speed, and nullified every feature of the mobility feat. We felt both cheated and disappointed--we would have chosen different things if we'd known. I ask you, great Justices, was it okay for our DM to surprise us with rules like that? Should we at least have had warning that these feature-ruining rules were coming our way? Thank you for your time and wisdom.

Wordse

To the honorable judges greetings And Jake the money is in the Third car in the Parking lot all black give them the code. Should I say something about Heeb Weedle the Weed Beetle? One of the players at our table is playing a wizard with a familiar, this familiar is a beetle. The player while a friend spends the majority of his time roleplaying as a drug dealing Beetle and I will not lie Heeb gets laughs at the table. I am not as amused but I don't want to ruin the fun. Heeb is not 100% of our sessions and has not warped thing too much but I am locked in on an amazing campaign but get ripped out of the world when Heeb shows up. Myself and our rouge in a party of six are the only ones not vibing with Heeb. So I ask are we just lame wet blankets and don't see how sick this beetle is or would it be fair if us to bring up how repellent a non PC is to us? PS if it does sway the decision Heeb's "Player" drives a Seebring the coolest car at the table

Sof

To the honourable justices and the bailiff who shall not be named. I present to you the case of: Killed in the name of...questions? I played my first ever PC, a lvl 2 bard Eladrin of spring who'd lost their twin sister in an attack in the fey (or so they thought). In session 4 the dm introduced a NPC who said they had information about my PCs twin. But they had to meet alone. As i build the whole PC around this I knew they wouldnt be able to decline. So I did. My PC asked a lot of questions, they thought the twin was dead and he implied that she wasnt, and the NPC got irritated and killed my PC. I tried to teleport with the Eladrin ability BUT there was a anti magic field and i got downed in one round. Turns out this was the campaigns lvl 20 PC build BBEG. This turned into a dispute between me and the dm for years as he didn't want to address that i felt a little betrayed by this. And is still something unresolved. Justices, I put myself at your mercy. Am i crazy or what?

Georgina Haf

To the honourable Crit Justices and the other one concerned… I write to you with the case of the Cleric who “derailed the whole campaign” I've been a fan of D&D for many years, however, it was only last year that my partner and I finally managed to secure a ln actual campaign locally to us. You can imagine our delight. We began The Ghosts of Saltmarsh, where i played a jovial Cleric of Pelor, whose aim was to raise enough money to help build a temple in the town. It started off well, everyone was getting to grips with the system, but ultimately enjoying the roleplay and banter, though we feared the group as a whole weren't as dedicated to the game as we were, including the DM, who continued to declare each session his distaste for 5e, preferring the older more “hardcore” DnD systems of the past. About 9 sessions in, after we had looted a haunted manor, we headed back to town to inform the town council of our findings. At this point, I was worried about the lack of interest shown by the other players, and I probably overcompensated trying to get everyone invested with some fun role-playing, latching on to another PCs idea to haggle and try to find the best price around town for some stolen goods we had found. The DM seemed to take issue with this course of action, lecturing us on alignment and telling us our gods had intervened, forcing me and the other PC, a Halfling folk hero, to tell the truth at all times (which is we all thought was hilarious and a fair punishment) But also stripping me of my Clerical powers until my god deemed me to have repented. I, not wanting to rock the boat any further, played along and decided to lean into the “good boy Cleric” role. So, when an old NPC by the name of Ned, who we learned had double crossed us, came out of the woodwork and subtly hinted to us that he was an overseer of the smuggling operations in the manor, I preceded to stand up and loudly declare him CRIMINAL SCUM! He ran, and very much wishing to gain my powers back, chased and tackled him to bring him to justice. The DM asked me to make a grapple check, to which I rolled a Nat 20. Everyone cheered, spirits were high at the table, we were all invested. But it was clear the DM was STILL unhappy about my actions, then out of character preceded to tell me and the others for the rest of the game how we had played the campaign wrong, what we should’ve have done instead, and what was going to happen next if I hadn’t “ruined it” I was openly accused of having derailed the whole campaign. Everyone left a little dejected that evening and we never continued the game. I ask you, was I wrong to have acted in such a way, ignoring alignment slightly in the name of investment and fun, or am I guilty of derailing the campaign? I throw myself humbly in front of your wisened feet. As a side note, we’re still on very good terms with everyone, especially the DM. We found he's much more amicable when playing 3E!

Doctor Ransom

To the most archangelic Supreme Crit justices Murphy, Axford, and Tanner, and the ungodly sinner bailiff Jon Odenhurtz, I bring you the case of “The Smitten Paladin.” While playing in a one-shot with some good buds of mine, a very sticky and intense situation occurred during the final battle with the big bad guy. My “friend” James, who was playing as a warforged Paladin named Junkbot, got charmed by an Incubus and immediately turned towards my PC, then asked the Incubus much too eagerly, “Shall I Divinely Smite him, Master?” After hitting my character twice, Junkbot used his highest level spell slots to Divine Smite me on both attacks, after which my PC dropped unconscious. Our party then TPK’ed immediately afterwards. Justices, I beseech thine most discerning deliberation. Was this Incubus-smitten Paladin well within his right to savagely smite my guy or should they have toned it down a notch? I await your most shrewd and sangfroid of sentences. P.S. - To my ‘friend’ James, “Fuck you, I love you, eat a rat.”

Rebecca N

Deacons of Dice Christ and... *looks at smudged writing on my hand*... Zeke, I seek forgiveness on the behalf of my DM. Our group has been playing through a Pathfinder module to learn the system, and we ran into an encounter with a demonic guard, who reluctantly tried to arrest us. We closed the door on him and tried to run away, which lead to a combat encounter. On one of his attacks, he crit on my Tripkee (Frog folk) Fighter, and immediately brought her from full health to Dying 2. Here the DM began to sweat, and he said the demon picked up my PC, and dragged her away a bit before dropping her and walking back to his "office", muttering about needing to do paperwork first that would probably take him long enough to complete that someone could help me. Here's where the transgression lies: The DM ended initiative after I was dropped, and while other PCs made some attempts to end the conditions on my character that would knock her back down if she was healed, they ultimately failed. I attempted to roll to recover from these conditions, and rolled a 1. Suddenly, the DM decided to have us reroll initiative (a pro-Murph move), but he ended up ignoring my failed rolls. My character survived, but we all know she should be dead. The DM very specifically said he didn't want to kill my character, but I feel awful because other PCs have died in this module. While I appreciate the DMs mercy, I know he has sinned to spare me. Please forgive us for these transgressions

Jackacoyit

Hello judges and the rightly under appreciated Bailiff Josh. I bring you the case of the possibly childish monk, in a campaign that a run a player had their Monk run through a portal out of the Sactum the party was safely resting in. The barbarian player then decided since it was the morning that his barbarian was still in his PJs and would not be jumping through the portal yet. Since the remaining players bar the barbarian had jumped through the portal, the Monk then tried to chat with some local demons to get information on a bag guy they are tracking, which quickly lead to a fight where the barbarian player refused to jump through the portal and join despite me the DM saying I was happy for him to have gotten ready by now, so they then sat for 2 full hours of combat just playing the wizards summoned beholderkin which I recommend so he had something to do so they didn't sit doing nothing and the wizard was kind enough to give up control. The party was fine with the barbarians decision but after the fight and a short rest the Monk after taking heat from the other players for his rushing ahead said his character had only meditated during the short rest was going to now stay behind and eat. This annoyed most of the players and the paladin specifically complained out of character at the monk player always being difficult and that this was just petty and childish note when the Barbarian decided to stay behind they were still annoyed with the Monk. This has lead to the Monk player taking a break from our games as he doesn’t think the group enjoys his character focused roleplay and doesn't think the group is treating him fair whixh is ruining his fun. I humbly ask the judges is there anywhere I should have intervened, who was in the wrong and is there anything I can do to ammend the situation? P.S. the monk has a history of playing lone wolf characters that only follow their code/objective and don't mess well witht he group which was been an ongoing issue.

spider_pasta

To the all equally ignominious justices of the supreme crit (how ignominious remains to be seen), I humbly stand before you with the case of the Operation Clumsy Fireman. I'm a player in a Curse of Strahd Campaign with a couple of friends and recently despite our DM warning us through an NPC not to try to fight a baddie as we'd probably die, we decided to anyway and between sessions talked amongst the players to strategize. A few days before the session our fighter (who has a masters in mathematics) sent a google doc link to the player-only group chat to a doc detailing a 15 part plan he titled "operation clumsy fireman" to give ourselves an advantageous starting position in the combat and give us an option to run if needed. The plan involved a strategic vortex warp by my wizard into a bathtub that we would have to drag to the top of the tower of the fortress we were in, and pushing him off into the path of a pre-aimed ballista. The doc was two pages single spaced and contained multiple charts where he had written code to run 10^6 simulations of all of the necessary rolls to determine our chance of success. The highest chance on the plan-critical vortex warp with low assumption of the enemy's modifiers and all our debuffs working was around 60%. The rest of the party had some reservations about this plan and we didn't go with it, and ended up running from the fight for our lives but successfully making it out with an important magic item initially. With knowledge of the fight, the plan actually had no chance of succeeding due to at the time unknown abilities of the enemy. We've been razzing the plan/our fighter a bit for the couple of sessions since and after the encounter the dm got let into the joke and said she would have smote us for clowning on her scary villain by trying to push him of a tower in a bathtub. The fighter maintains that his plan was a better option than what we went with, was 100% compliant with rules as written, and is playfully indignant about us clowning on him about it. Justices, Id like to settle the matter once and for all, are we right to make fun of what i think was a pretty ridiculous plan that wasn't that likely to work out even though he put a lot of work into it or is he right argue for the power of pure crisp mathematics over an untested option. I humbly await your ruling. (he does listen to dungeon court, hi brian!)

Devin Danko

Humble deacons of the church of dice, I lay myself before your altar. I often play spellcasters. A couple wizards, a druid, standard stuff. A large part of playing them is preparing spells to face the challenges you foresee. I am very bad at this. It seems that every time I put together the perfect list to solve the problems for the coming day, none of them are ever useful! Or, when the moment comes where one specific spell would be the *perfect* solution to some obstacle, I didn't prepare it! I am often left with a few low-tier offensive spells when I thought it would be a day of exploration, or no utility spells when I was expecting a grand melee. Surely I am cursed to always be unprepared, despite my meticulous preparation! And in my shame, I will admit that on more than one occasion, I have secretly swapped out a spell when I was not allowed to. Please, forgive my sin so that I may no longer be tempted to violate the sacred laws set forth by the good Player's Handbook! I am at your mercy.

Juli

Dearest upstanding judges and also the guy who reads these out loud (Jacques I think?): I was running combat and a player hit an npc with guiding bolt, meaning the next attack against that character would have advantage as they are covered with a glimmering light. I had been planning for the npc to go invisible on their next turn which raised the question — does turning invisible after being hit by guiding bolt also erase the glimmering aura and cancel out advantage, or would it be pointless to go invisible in this situation? Ultimately I ruled that invisibility would overpower the guiding bolt aura because it was a higher level spell and guiding bolt does not have specific language about this like faerie fire does. I’m not sure it was the right choice and maybe nobody argued with me because they were being nice since it was my first time dming. All the examples I could find online were about using guiding bolt to locate an already invisible person, so I wanted to go straight to the highest court in the land! Ok thanks byee

Bagofchips123

To the Hottest and Moistest crit justices and extremely hunky bailiff, I present the case of the noble bullywug steed. In our campaign, we have a bullywug named Bellubba that the crew befriended after the Cabrina Serpenter Concert. We went into a giant war and bellubba had to fight. My players suggested that "what if a lizard just randomly shows up from the ground and bellubba starts riding it and gets a noble steed?" I thought it was a stupid low chance of a random lizard showing up, and the fact giant lizards weren't in this part of the map, so I said to roll 2 nat 20s for it to happen. They failed but now they insist on EVERY SESSION to start off trying to roll 2 nat 20s to see if bellubba gets a random lizard steed, even when we wasn't in the party anymore. Should I be punished for not giving bellubba his steed or should the players realize that it just won't happen and kidnapping a kobold for bellubba to ride is too insane. Stay Jazzy 2 crew!

Lili McGee

Dice Christ, why have you forsaken me?! I alternate between playing in a campaign and running a home brew game. Recently, I went on vacation but HAD scheduled myself back to have plenty of time to prep for the next session. Instead, I extended my trip bailed on my homebrew session for some beachy R&R. Upon my return, a friend ran a one-shot in my place, and we proceeded to roll TWENTY Nat 1s and fifteen Nat 2s. Since then, I haven’t cracked a 10. Did I anger the Dice Gods with sun-soaked betrayal? I beg forgiveness—and a Nat 20 or two.

brightrune

To the honorable justices and the perfectly fine bailiff- I present the case of Pokémon nomenclature: I am the wife worm of an incredible forever DM who homebrews nearly every aspect of our campaigns. I respect his craft, but I would be lying if I said I don’t enjoy the occasional goof, especially during character creation. Over the years, I have played several mildly goofy characters such as a hot pink grung teen named Gur’lie, an Ooze cleric named High Priestess (HP), and most recently our real life cat who becomes a divination wizard when she falls asleep. All of these characters were for one shots or guest characters in campaigns where I’m not a main PC, and I always put in the effort to make them “real” characters beyond the initial goof. We’ve started making characters for our next full-length campaign. The story will have a gritty, dark vibe and the character I’m working on matches that vibe perfectly- The only problem is her name. I want to name her Altaria, which also happens to be the name of a Pokémon. I think it’s a great fantasy name, and this character has a secret identity so I really like having “alter” as part of her name. However, my beloved DM refuses to have a character “named after a Pokémon” in his game. I explained that while I know the name from Pokémon, this character is NOTHING like the adorable flying dragon type of the same name. I truly feel this name fits the character I’m building. I even offered to use Altaria as her FAKE name at the start of the campaign to soften the blow, but he simply isn’t having it. So I humbly ask: judges, what’s in a name? Is it wrong of me to repurpose a solid name that originally belonged to a baby blue bird dragon, or is my DM wrong for dismissing the name due to its real world connotations?

Molanarch

To the magnanimous justices and the kinda cute bailiff haha Jk. Unless?… I present the case of the mildly moist fire. Years ago my group started the Elemental Evil campaign and after a few months of playing fizzled out because life got busy. A couple years later we decided to restart the campaign with new characters and all agreed we would build our own characters around specific elements. I made a Triton Sorcerer who had all ice and water spells so I can be specifically useful against fire. A few levels in we entered an area where we encounter 2 greater fire elementals in an enclosed room. Our dm warned us before we entered this area that we were not supposed to be here yet and that it would be extremely difficult to make it through. We agreed and went in anyway. On my turn I cast the Tidal Wave spell which hit both elementals. After calculating the bludgeoning damage I asked if they take any extra damage from water which upon my DM checking, confirmed they do. They take 3 cold damage for every gallon of water splashed on them. There was a lot of arguing about how much water would actually be considered splashed on the fire elementals as the wave would technically fully engulf them. There was also the argument that magical water was not the same as normal water. After multiple online searches online with no Official™️ answers, my dm ruled that they only took 4 extra cold damage. They proceeded to whomp our entire party on the next turn and instead of being killed we were all imprisoned by cultists. Here the kicker. In the prison we encountered our previous characters from our first party to which our dm pulled out our old character sheets and declared we would play as those characters for the break out. After the break out we were given the option to either stay as our new character or play as our old character. So Justice’s, I ask, was I wrong to be upset that the specific strength I built my character around was stolen from me for my dms clever twist?

Quack Dragon

To the honorable justices Axford, Murphy, and Tanner, as well as that other guy that just lost the game. I present the case of “Strahd v. His Own Portrait” I’m playing a 9th level wild magic sorcerer who is Strahd in a weakened state and missing his memories after being almost killed by Vecna. My party and I having just killed Baba Lysaga were searching through her hut when we came across a portrait of Strahd. I rolled history and remembered when I had the portrait commissioned and completed, I wanted it so began to take it off the wall. I was killed instantly and my magic items were vaporized as I was hit by what I think was a modified version of disintegrate. I asked if I could counter spell it my DM said yes, I rolled a 19. He then had me roll 2 Dex saves (DC 27) to save myself and the magic items I initially succeeded in saving myself but not my magic items until I remember that I had advantage bc of my Robe of the Arch Magi, I rolled again and succeeded on both rolls. My DM then had me roll again and if I succeeded it would only save my Staff of Power, I passed. My friend brought up later that my counter spell should have negated all of that and I think that if I had remembered the portrait that I would have remembered putting a spell into it, also my DM is a bit of stickler for the rules so it’s surprising that they’d modify disintegrate to destroy magic items as well. So justices was I fairly womped or do I deserve my magic items back.

BradyRocks

(Jake reads) To Murph and Emily, I hope all of your cats are well! Please give them each a butt tap or noggin scratch for their hard work, whichever they prefer. (Emily reads) To Jake and Caldwell, I’m a fairly new father and listening to your shows have made some hard days a bit better. I want to thank you both, and remind you you’re doing an amazing job. I write to you in desperation, your honors, for I feel I’ve exasperated my options. I’ve been practicing what I’ve dubbed “Theoretical D&D” for like 7 years and have gained a solid understanding of the game. I have basic experience DMing and playing but haven’t gotten to experience higher levels or deeper connections from established characters. My friends are flaky, my own wife will often display interest at first, before spending most of the game on TikTok. With 5.5e, I’m considering trying once more to introduce them to the new setting and hopefully spark some interest in the collaborative world-building. Do I have faith that Dice Christ will guide them through this courtroom, unshackle their ankles and sit them at her pews? Or do I abandon my lifelong companions and as Justice “From the Top Rope” Murphy would say; “get new friends?” I await your judgement from the darkest corner of your courtroom, playing Pokemon roms on my phone.

David Pazmino

To the Honorable Judges Murphy, Tanner, and Afford, and… uh… Balif John? Your honors, I come before you not as a mere mortal, but as a victim of narrative injustice. This is The Case of the Misnaming Dragonborn. I play in a campaign where you roll for your race and stats and play as a person who's been reincarnated from our world to a dnd world. Here is Carl: My purple dragonborn cleric with bad luck, worse dice, and the shortest life expectancy this side of a kobold in a wizard’s duel. Carl met an early grave, as is tradition for level 1s. And so, from the ashes of Carl’s tragic nat 1s, rose Randy — a new hero. A fighter. A fresh start. New stats. New class. New soul. But alas… not a new race. Dragonborn again. As if fate herself couldn’t let me escape Carl’s legacy. Here lies the tragedy: For nearly a year, I have walked the path of Randy. I have fought, bled, and roleplayed admirably in his scaled boots. And yet… my party those I trusted most still call me Carl. Not in passing. No, Your Honors. As a habit. A casual disregard for Randy’s existence. Every time they call me "Carl," another part of Randy dies inside. And while I correct them, they laugh. Tell me, your Honors — do all humans look the same to you? Are all elves interchangeable? Is this racial profiling?! Randy deserves better. And now I stand before you with a plea. A crossroads. Should I just embrace this mockery, give in to the peer pressure, and change my name back to Carl — thereby erasing poor Randy’s identity forever… or continue this struggle to be recognized for who I truly am, not who I once was? Your Honors, I am tired. Randy is tired. Even Carl’s ghost is tired of being misattributed. All I seek is justice… or at least a ruling. Sincerely, Randy "Definitely Not Carl" the Dragonborn Fighter

Barpo Goodbarrel Bard-Barian

Oh Glorious and resplendent judges, and the decent baliff Jim. I come to you with a case that has haunted me for several years. I fear I may have transgressed as a DM and I seek forgiveness and clarity. I was DMing a home brew campaign that involved wererats and other interesting Lycanthropes. During one fight, the party’s aasimar cleric was bitten by a Wererat. When a humanoid is bitten by a wererat they must succeed on a con save or by “cursed by lycanthropy”. My player argued convincingly that as a cleric he was immune to disease so it should not affect him, but since the wording says curse I ruled it still would. But I gave him advantage on the rule because he was a cleric. He ultimately failed the save, and became a cheese loving lycanthrope. He thought this was fun, but I have been wondering if I made the right call. So oh justices, was I right or should my cleric have been freed from the rat race?

Skipps

Forgive me judges/mouths of dice christ for I have committed an egregious sin. I have doubt in my heart. I am a new DM who is running a campaign about a bunch of adventurous living in cities upon a collection of floating islands. I only have a couple of sessions under my belt but so far it is going well and my party is having a good time and has told me such. Here’s the problem though, I hate it. I don’t like DMing. I don’t like prepping. I don’t really like my story either. I spend most of my sessions making sure everyone else is having a good time but walk away feeling like I wasn’t having fun at all. I really want to like it, I love telling stories after all and have learned so much from all of you DMing, but I just don’t enjoy it myself. I don’t want to give up because we’ve only done a couple of sessions and I’m hoping it’ll get better but I do find myself hoping that someone will cancel so I don’t have to do the sessions. I’m ashamed of myself and my doubt. Please, oh honorable clergy, what should I do? Should I break my DM’s oath and tap out? Or is there something I can do to make it more fun? I await any judgement you may unleash

Old Dirty Blastoise

Dearest Justices and Bailiff Jurk Haywitz…I present to you the case of “Am I the Asshole?” I had been playing with a group of good dudes for about 4 years through multiple campaigns, and we had a great DM. However, there was one player in our group who would consistently rule check during games, DM over our DM and tell us, unsolicited, how our characters’ mechanics worked pretty consistently, which was very annoying. About a year ago their character was petrified by a Medusa during an intense battle where everyone else survived. After the session, the rest of the party spent the off-week hashing out ideas on how we could save them, including abandoning our current quest to go back to town and find a Cleric, try to Reduce their size and stick them in a Bag of Holding to transport them, Tenser’s Floating Disc them out of the dungeon…we were pulling out all the stops. At the next session, ready to save our temporarily frozen comrade, we were instead introduced to this player’s new character, who was supposed to be a Kua-Toa NPC in the module we were playing. It turns out that instead of saving his old PC, which was the party’s intention, the DM & player had decided unilaterally that this wasn’t going to happen and we now had this new fish person in our group. By design Kua-Toa are an antagonistic race, which the player roleplayed fantastically. They spent the entire session squirting our party with Shape Water spells, talking in gibberish and generally doing whatever they could to piss us off. What broke me though, was that this player, who was so mechanics-focused and spent years rules lawyering the party, skinned his fishman into a Stars Druid. For example, a melee claw attack instead used the Starry Form Archer ability, which mechanically is a ranged spell attack. The player and DM thought this was all hysterical and a great idea. The vibe of the party had shifted so dramatically from trying to save this player’s cool character after a hard Medusa battle we barely survived, to instead having to deal with an annoying, broken fish troll that I ended up confronting the DM. I told him that he and the player had effectively stripped the party of our agency and collaborated behind the scenes to skin an NPC into a total vibe-kill party member with rules that didn’t make sense. The fact that this rules lawyer would effectively turn heel and embrace hypocrisy to transform into an even more annoying archetype was the last straw for me, and after a heated text exchange I ended up leaving the campaign, after which the DM said he kicked me out anyway. Justices of this noble establishment, am I the asshole? I can’t help but think the DM and this player have some burden to bear. Upon reflection I could have probably dealt with it better, but to what end? Be trolled by both player and DM by this annoying, empowered fish man? To this day it bums me out that this was how our awesome Pandemic-era group fell apart and can’t help but feel responsible. I humbly await your response.

Anthony

To all the bailiff and justices who may or may not be babies, be having babies or just act like them, i bring to you the case of the acroletic rope swing. I am a player in a campaign that is set in the WOW universe, we were fighting in a combat where there were multiple ledges and platforms around the map. It is in a gnomish city full of technology and constructs we had to fight. We were a gnomish sorcerer, Dwarven barbarian(me) and eleven paladin. I could tell the combat was unwinnable at a certain point and so I wanted us to run. Sorcerer almost down, paladin almost down, barbarian(me)...mostly fine. The gnome attempts to fly across and gets hit, losing concentration and falling into the grinding gears below. The paladin attempts to swing across a platform too far away to jump to get away using some dangling mechanical wiring. The DM calls for an acrobatics check, stating that because the platforms were diagonal to each other it would require finesse instead of strength. I said it was more about holding onto your weight on the wire, not turning your body slightly in the other direction. Our DM dislikes when we succeed too easily or often and will call for checks with skills we are bad at simply because he thinks it makes a better narrative, regardless of the rules. Our paladin had a -1 to dexterity and would have fallen to their death. Our gnome had just fallen to their death and my character, the tank and "mother of dragon" style character would not leave her friend behind, not technically having seen him die and was being ground up by the gears that had just smashed her friend to pieces. We were all going to die. I ask you babies of the court, is it right that the DM, while womping us would continue to call for bad checks simply to make the narrative "better" PS after arguing and the consequences of a TPK were seen he did a bunch of handwavy stuff to revive the gnome and let the paladin and i get away.

Maximus Jiron

To the glorious and effervescent justices, and the bailiff, I think it was jork, I present to you the case of the enabling DM. During covid my friend and I really started getting into how to play dnd, obviously we could only play over discord at that time but as restrictions lessened up we started looking for our first in person game. Fast forward we find one, make characters, and are super pumped to finally play in person, that was until we went to the first session. In the game was myself, my friend, two other random players, the dm, and his girlfriend; this is where the problems started. We started at lvl 3 which is typical, however the dm’s girlfriend had not one but two lvl 5 characters with magic items and feats from another home game. At first I was not too bothered but as we started playing it was obvious the story was meant to have her as the main character with everyone else as supporting cast. Once again as a first time in person player I was not too bothered just because I wanted to play so bad, however what finally got to me is when I realized she had completely stopped rolling to do anything and was proclaiming NAT 20s and damage that were supposedly rolled before it was her turn in combat because “she knew what she was going to do on her turn.” We didn’t want to be accusatory but we noticed this kept up encounter after encounter for a few weeks, ultimately taking away all of the stakes with the game. So we brought it up to the DM and he said he lets her get away with those things because she has a lot going on personally and he is only dming to bring her some joy so we could either like it or not. We chose not to like it and my friend and I completely ghosted them and finally convinced our friends to play with us starting up our group that still plays together today. But I ask Justices, should we have given them the benefit of the doubt or were we right to leave the game and ghost them? P.S. One of the girlfriend characters was a mute, that could only telepathically talk to her other character because they had a psychic link that was formed when they were younger allowing them to take actions on each other's turns basically giving each of her characters two actions and bonus action per round.

Cubsguy108

Greetings Justices and other! I bring you a case of perhaps my own stupidity and hubris. So during a current campaign I’m in, the castle we were allies with was taken over and while traveling to try to broker a ceasefire with the dwarves, we encountered a village of elves being attacked by the dwarven army. My party flew down and waited for a few minutes while our barbarian, who had developed a friendly relationship with the dwarven king, flew on his own to broker peace. After a few minutes my character couldn’t take the slaughter anymore, and I decided to attack, not knowing how long it would take to broker peace and if anything would be left of the village, of my people (I am a half-elf). I just couldn’t stand by and watch. In the chaos my PC died from a roof being thrown at him by a giant (he was later revived, thank you druids). My friends still give me crap for getting myself killed for jumping in too soon when the barbarian ironically was working toward peace, but I maintain there’s no way I could’ve sat by and watched defenseless villagers be slaughtered in front of my eyes. Am I in the right, or do I deserve a pie in the face in addition to the roof my PC got in his face?

Ryxis

The case of the Pride Themed One-Shot: To the most honorable judges, and Jiff, the bailiff who can only go lower, I bring you the case of the Pride Themed One-Shot. About a year ago, I played in a 5e game for Pride month at a gay campground (the kind where clothing is optional). It was clear the DM had put in a tremendous amount of effort when planning the game. There was a map filled with locations key to our pride-themed adventure, pre-made characters, and custom painted miniatures. The first few hours were a lot of fun. The DM gave everyone plenty of freedom, and I immediately felt a bond with the other players as we goofed off and explored the unique setting. There was just one problem. Judges, it was a beautiful day outside. I love getting to roll dice as much as the next player, but we were in a windowless basement, and I was starting to feel the allure of a sunny day and a pool filled with attractive, scantily clad people. So, when half-way through the adventure, some of the other players wanted to wrap up early, I agreed with them. I regretted it though when I saw the disappointment in the DM's eyes. It was clear we had barely scratched the surface of his world. As a compromise, the DM asked if we wanted to skip ahead to the final boss fight. Even though I was eager for some fresh air, I agreed, as did a few other players, and we proceeded to wipe the floor with some homophobic cult members looking to sabotage the local fantasy Pride parade. It was a fun time, but I could tell the DM was still disappointed as he packed up pages of notes he never got to use. Judges, did I make the right call in deciding to wrap up early with the other players, or should I have advocated more on behalf of a fellow DM who had worked hard to create a fun and unique adventure for all of us? As is tradition, I shall humbly accept your ruling, whatever it may be.

TeamLouie

Oh and this is only a sampling of the tedium of what happened in the campaign. I just left a lot of it out to keep the submission short.

Robin Lima

May it please the court (idk I’m like 2-3 years behind on the pod do we still say that nowadays?) I present not a DnD case, but a Pathfinder 2e one: the case of the feeble alchemist! Our table consists of me (the GM) an Alchemist, Barbarian, and an Oracle (think if a cleric and warlock had an accursed baby). The party was on a week long sailing trip across the sea, and failed an encounter check and ended up running into two Reefclaws (think a real gnarly fucked up crabster). The fight ended up being more brutal than I expected, and downed our Oracle! Our Alchemist, in a move that confused the entire party, attempted to Grapple one of the Reefclaws and succeeded, despite his +0 strength and being untrained in Athletics! Everyone was excited, until the Alchemist said he was going to run across the boat with Reefclaw in tow as his next action. I said No, as it’s a 4 foot wet long lobster aberration who’s actively trying to wriggle out of his grasp. I offered the alchemist to try to use the Shove or Reposition actions if he wanted to move the lobster, and I’d give a bonus since he already had it grabbed, but then the alchemist said: “No, I can easily move with it. I’d be able to do it in real life too.”. I stood my ground, and said that’s unreasonable, especially given that he has a plus Zero to athletics. He said I would let the Barbarian (my girlfriend) do it, and accused me of being biased against him. I said the Barbarian has a +8 to athletics, and even then I’d make her roll. Frustrated, the Alchemist just ended his turn, even though he had 2 actions left and the party was getting their butt kicked. He was obviously upset for the rest of the session, so was I wrong for not conceding and letting him run with the lobster?

Ben Fleuter

To the distinguished justices and the bailiff Hake Jurwitz, I come to you with the case of the Denied Dispel. I was a player in a campaign where the BBEG was a legendary paladin who had been twisted into being king of the undead. He was reanimating a bunch of other heroes of old as his generals - all of their memories and abilities from life intact - just undead bound to their creator's control. At one point our cleric cast Dispel Evil and Good on one of the undead generals. The spell (her highest level at the time) states that "As your action, you touch a creature you can reach that is charmed, frightened, or possessed by a celestial, an elemental, a fey, a fiend, or an undead. The creature you touch is no longer charmed, frightened, or possessed by such creatures." The GM ruled that the BBEG's necromantic control over the general was not explicitly charm or possession, and the spell did nothing. We players argued that the spirit of the spell is that it breaks the hold undead have over someone else. We went with the GM's ruling, but the cleric seemed disappointed - not just to waste her highest level spell and see her plan fail, but to not get the chance to roleplay with the freed undead general. Justices, was the GM wrong to completely shut down this spell? Were the players wrong to think necromantic control is a form of charm or possession? Or was Wizards of the Coast wrong for making one of their hundreds of spells so potentially plot-breaking?

Devin Awe

Context deprived, 2025 I'm haunted armor. Heat Metal on me, but Cold. Should I hurt? Jake Sucks.

Nathaniel F

To the most esteemed Baby Bailiff Boy-Witz, judges, and the lowly Byron Smurfy. I beseech you to judge my thieving DM- before it’s too late! I suspect he’s about to strike again. Several years ago, in my groups first campaign together, we were hired by a simulacrum-like illusory wizard who wanted to become a real boy. I don’t remember details but the original was dead and had started making an “illusion-made-real” machine. Our Artificer and Wizard fixed it up, and to test it, the Wizard made an illusion of a pile of platinum bars, totaling some 500k gp or something. It worked, so we used it on the illusory Wizard. All seemed successful. As we happily skipped our way back to town, our DM told us the platinum had a half life of one hour, and is starting to disappear (but the now-real wizard was fine). As he mentions this, a little red devil guy, complete with evil mustache and French accent, pops out of our PC wizard’s watch. He taunted us or whatever and disappeared. We shrug it off as a later problem and we book it to the town bank. There, We set up a deal with the bank teller to launder the disappearing money, and hand her the platinum. At that moment, said little devil guy pops back out, pushes the teller into the bank vault portal, jumps in after her, and locks it from the inside. Sealing our money, nay our joy, away. We have played many campaigns in this world, and the bank is “still investigating” - Real world and in-game years later! Then last night, we defeated several dragons in Avernus and claimed their hoards. The most money we’ve ever seen! And we just know it’s too good to be true.. So please, lest he strikes again, judge him, take your executioner’s Axe(ford) to him if you must!

Ian Ruacho

To the Somewhat Honorable Justices Tanner, Murphy, and Axford, and especially to the beautiful, resplendent, dazzling Balif John I present to you the case of the alignment tattler Some years ago, I was in a DND game with my friends. I was a lawful evil oathbreaker paladin and one of my party members was a lawful good warlock. We were trying to make a deal with a god to save town full of people that had been captured and enslaved, and the god offered us powerful weapons and artifacts if we simply left the town to suffer in slavery. My paladin was all for this, as he didn't care about the town anyway and I expected an argument within the party, but what surprised everyone at the table was when the lawful good Warlock agreed with me and broke the tie. This felt wrong to me, so I argued that with a lawful good alignment he would either have to change his alignment or just not do that. He insisted that his character would be completely fine with leaving a town full of people to a life of slavery for, and I quote, "A really cool item". The argument went on for roughly 20 IRL minutes, and eventally he agreed that he would not take the deal and as he was the tiebreaker we did not as a party either. Justices, I bring this case forward because in the years since, I have come to believe that I was the one in the wrong here. I don't know why I was so insistent on his alignment, as in games before and since no one has cared about alignment, it was simply something else on the character sheet you filled out because it was there. Was I truly in the wrong here or should that one guy have stayed truer to who his character had been up to that point.

Dylan Pascal (aka Dapper Warlock)

To the Honorable Supreme Crit Justices Axford, Murphy, and Tanner, and the bailiff who was in that one CollegeHumor sketch about the emails, I think his name is Amy or something. This is an old story from my high school days, of my first time playing Shadowrun. I present the case of Invisible Magician v. Apathetic Teammate. If any of the Justices are unfamiliar, Shadowrun is a fantasy cyberpunk game. It's got all the trappings of cyberpunk, but with magic and elves and orcs and trolls thrown in as well. I was playing a magician, and our group was essentially a private investigator agency taking various odd jobs from clients. Our first job is to get some data off a guy's computer. The guy is some hacker shut-in who lives in his grandmother's basement, so one of my friends distracts the grandmother at the front door while I sneak in and get the data off the computer. That part goes off without a hitch. But then it's time to get OUT of the house. I turn to my friend and ask, both in-character as an invisible mage who doesn't want to arouse suspicion, and out-of-character as a new player who's having trouble rendering the scene in his mind, "How should I get out of here?" He sighs and says, "I don't care, dude." "Oh." I turn to the GM and declare my intention to jump through a window, 100% cognizant of the fact I am NOT saying I OPEN a window and CLIMB through. So the GM narrates me flinging myself bodily through plate glass, causing a massive ruckus and getting granny's attention, who just happens to have a shotgun in arms reach that she whips in my direction and opens fire, sending a few shards of buckshot into my leg. My character survives, I limp back to the escape vehicle and we complete the job. Much fun is had and it's a story I still chuckle thinking about sixteen years later, but I wonder: who was more in the wrong? Should I have turned to the GM to investigate the space instead of turning to my friend, or was my friend in the wrong for waving off my request for direction, especially because he knows I think I'm funny? I stand on the gallows awaiting your judgements, Your Honors.

Riley M

To the glorious cardinals in the Church of Dice Christ. I write not to confess a sin but instead to celebrate a religious rite. Since my partner and I started dating, I introduced her to the world of dnd and she now loves all things NADDPOD and Dimension 20. Recently, she went from my girlfriend to my fiancée and we have now began planning our wedding. We decided to get married next July, and found our venue. They had availability for July 11th and July 18th. My need math brain thought 7/18/26 would be cool because 7+1=8=2+6. She called me a nerd and said 7/11 is better because it rhymes and we might be able to get a free slurpie machine at the wedding. She then proposes we “Let Dice Christ decide”. We grab two d20s and decide to have a roll off, and whichever number is rolled first is our wedding date. After three rounds I roll an 11 and now our date is set! She got her date, but I’m just happy it’s been blessed and to be marrying someone who would call upon Dice Christ in our time of need.

Bebs

To the luscious Justices Axford, Tanner, and Murphy, and hey that one friend of Amir's... I come forward with a case against my players. I am DMing a Feywild campaign for my husband and 2 of our buddies. I told them this would be their chance to play a weird character/animal since it's the feywild, and had many texts and a session 0 to set up their character's backstories. Here are my grievances I lay before the court. 1. Two of my players are pretty busy people, so before I started writing my lore and plan for the campaign I asked if everyone believed they could commit to playing at least every other week, and everyone agreed. Well we play as a group maybe once every other month. This makes building my story quite hard as they don't remember what has happened, and thus aren't interested in the story. (I know scheduling is always hard but they should have been honest first so I could have prepped a simpler monster-of-the-week type campaign) 2. Since we don't play often, they don't know their characters. They don't think about them outside of when we play. This group is normally great at RP, but since they don't have any vested interest in these characters it seems like they don't care to explore the world. and finally 3. All of us in this group are very close friends, and thus when we get together to play dnd we are excited to see each other. Before every session I cook a home cooked meal and we have a beer or two and catch up, and then play dnd. Well the chatter crosses over to dnd time, so when we are in the middle of a crazy battle, 2 of the players will start just talking about sports and we get taken out of the scene. Justices, what should I do? Should I scrap my grand plan for this campaign and say fuck it we'll do monster of the week? How do I get them to care about their characters? And how do I get these boys to focus? Am I to be punished for not being an engaging DM? I prostrate myself before the court.

Josh Meier

🙏 Dice Christ Confessional 🙏 To the merciful court of justices and the Spindley thin, oh so very thin, ankled Baliff Jake. I put before you a heavy confession of guilt and shame. In my first years of DMing I had hosted a campaign with my close friends. We were maybe 4 sessions in where I created an encounter in a forest temple against a Hag and her Shambling Mound pet. It was going well, my party decided to sacrificing their actions/turns to set up a wild play. 2 of them chose to be grappled to distract the mound while another member "helped" launch our paladin in the air. They Bard cast Heat metal on the paladins blade before the Paladin sunk a smiting blade into its head. It was a beautiful combo, but here is my transgression; Me being the new "by the book" DM looked at the stats of a shambling mound saw it was "resistant" to fire damage. So I declared because the blade was heated it took 0 damage! The party didn’t complain but the mood and excitement definitely left the room. It wasn't until days later when i realized resistant does not mean immune! Not only did I break the law of rule of cool, I was a joy thief! Judges, should I be crucified for this? I humbly await judgment.

Alan C

To the Jurassic Justices Tanner-dactyl, Velocir-Axford, and Di-Murph-odon, and the alright-in-my-books Bailiff John Hurwitz-eratops, I present The Case of Plot Armor Proficiency. I’m a first-time DM running a campaign for fellow first-timers — a mix of college and hometown friends. The party: Gwenevere the tiefling sorcerer, Seaslug the dwarven ranger, Caracara the human fighter, Freduardo the half-orc rogue/monk, and Teo, an elderly elven warlock with a primal archfey patron who reveres the natural cycles of life and death. Before the finale, Teo dreamed of his patron — a terrifying rotting stag covered in lichen — reminding him that death is sacred. The next day, the Level 4 party raced to stop a wyrmling’s ritual. I planned two encounters before the boss fight. First: harpies, easily handled. Second: kobolds and a CR 2 Lizardfolk Geomancer. The Geomancer’s Hail of Stone recharged four turns in a row. Most of the party failed their saves. Everyone dropped at least once and burned nearly all their potions. Then Teo went down. He failed a death save. Then ate another Hail of Stone. The ranger had Cure Wounds but was locked in melee and couldn’t reach him without risking a gauntlet of opportunity attacks. Teo’s next turn. He rolled a 9. Silence. Then he asked, “...Uh, am I dead?” I panicked. “Your patron casts Guidance. That bumps it to a 10.” The fighter healed him next round. Teo survived to see the boss fight. His player laughed and called it “plot armor,” but I’ve felt guilty ever since. The patron shouldn’t have intervened but killing a new player right before the finale felt cruel. The party still razzes me for the fight’s difficulty and for divine DM intervention. So I ask: was I right to show mercy after unknowingly crafting a death trap, or should Teo have checked into the retirement home in the sky? I await your ruling. May it bring peace, punishment, or pleasure. P.S. After the finale, the sorcerer multiclassed into bard, and the fighter and monk retired for a wizard/artificer and spores druid. Heals are plentiful now.

Jorge Fuentes

To the exalted arch bishops of dice Christ and the guy who comes for the pickle juice, I bring a confession that has been weighing on me for my entire dnd life. I have never played in an actual dnd 5e campaign. I keep telling my DM that I want to play 5e and he’s a guy who will, when hanging out casually, just buy a new system that’s not dnd and then backlog 5e further. He has 24 systems that aren’t 5e. As such I turned my focus to outside my table, an act of heresy I know but a man has his needs. Each 5e campaign I’ve joined have all been either abandoned, postponed, or simply cancelled. I do not make characters with backstory because why should I if they’re just gonna get shelved indefinitely. It has gotten to the point where I don’t want to make characters with ties to any campaign cause I don’t want it to be cancelled. This is a point of contention and I feel like I am justified but I know I’m not. Please please PLEASE I beseech you to lift this curse from my shoulders so I can just play some good ol 5e, or at least give me the inspiration to finish my 5e world so I can run something in the system!

Roll Daddy Dungus

To the supreme crit justices, all of whom are equal in strength and then the strongest, Jake the Howitzer. I beseech your counsel regarding how I got Arby’s: We Have the Beef’d. I had a regular dnd group years ago, and on one of our last sessions before our forever DM and host moved to a different city, he proposed a change in our usual dnd meal. Instead of our local pizza joint, coupled with home made ranch and a fresh salad, he proposed we go and eat $20 of 10 for 10 Arby’s crispy chicken sandwiches. That’s right, 20, sweaty chicken sandwiches for 5 dudes. I’ve never beef’d a chicken so hard in my life. We ate them in silence and he skipped town next week. I think about it once a month. P.S. we’re all on good terms but don’t play dnd anymore, maybe it was the chicken?

Hunter.osty

To the honorable justices Axford, Murphy, and Tanner, and the three Kenkus in a trench coat that call themselves Jake, I present to you: the post mortem portal problem. I am writing this on my Fiancé’s account and he has agreed to stand trial! I wrote a Greek mythos home brew campaign where my party played as Demi gods, acting on behalf of Olympus in a war between gods and titans, and as a huge Greek mythos nerd I spent many hours on prep for each session. The campaign’s main turning point/climax was meant to come in an epic dungeon crawl mimicking the descent to the underworld to meet Hades and convince him to join the war against titans. The entrance to the underworld was a lake that each player had to swim to the bottom of, and make a death save after surfacing on the other side, they were allowed to use any buffs they wanted, but in the end my fiance failed and “drowned” in the lake. That’s when their healer remembered she had revivify prepped for this exact reason. He was back on his feet and i was preparing to begin the dungeon crawl and when he asked a question, where in the underworld would he have ended up upon dying. Me being true to my Greek passion knew he would’ve ended up in the beaches of the underworld, only a ferry ride away from their ultimate destination, and upon hearing this, he hatched a plan that would completely skip all the underworld dungeon coolness I had just spent all week prepping! It was his freaking teleport spell. He had SEEN the beaches, and it stood to reason he could describe them well enough to open a portal to them, taking the entire party from the start of the multiple session dungeon crawl at the death save lake straight to Hades’ front door step! Ultimately we rolled with it and I took a pause to prep some more so we’d have material for the session. I wasn’t mad, but I was soo bummed that all that work and world building was thwarted by a dead man walking. So judges and 3 kenkus in a trenchcoat, was I wrong to allow these shenanigans or should I have found some way to prevent this play? We humbly await your ruling and will send in video evidence of the ruling being carried out!

Grace Holland

To the almighty crit court and sidekick baliff, I bring you the case of unbalanced pvp: I was running a kids on broom campaign. I had 2 players that been playing for 2 years and a new player (new to our game, not new to ttrpgs) that had been playing for ~2 months. In lieu of traditional leveling up, I would reward characters with homebrewed abilities after completing an arc based on what happened in the arc itself. This was all fine until we ran a snowball fight pvp session and one of the old players brought out all their abilities to womp the newish player. The newer player complained he didnt know his party members had these extra abilties and it was unfair he didn't have any to which I replied since he joined the 2 arcs they "completed" involved war crimes and walking away because "it wasn't their problem" neither of which I wanted to reward so he hasn't earned anything special. Also secretely I didn't want to restrict the old player because this was one of the only times she actually used all her abilities as my players usually forgot about them. Judges, should I have intervened and limited my old player to even out this unbalanced homebrewed combat? Was I unfairly playing favorites? Or was it low stakes enough to say that's just how the cookie crumbles? I await your steadfast judgement PS: These two players later had an out of game falling out and only the og player stayed in the party, so there may have been other feelings at the table I wasn't aware of that it made so contentious.

Daniel Baskins

To the honorable Judges who defend the land and uphold the rule of crit and their lackey. I bring you the case of the fucked up cleric. About a year ago I played in a one shot that turned into a campaign (or at least it was suppose to). It was a VERY magic heavy setting so everyone was at minimum a half caster. We played this over zoom, and I had play with all but one of these people before. We all had slightly problematic but OP characters, for the bit, and we worked well as a dysfunctional family. That is except for the unknown challenger. He played a cleric who had a customized d100 table of different drugs and their effects. When he was suffering withdrawal he was insufferable. Not contributing to the party and actively taking away from the narrative. On MANY occasions he would take a drug that would fully incapacitate him and just expect us to carry him through a dungeon. It was funny for the one shot, but as the campaign drug on (pun intended) the drugs seemed to get worse. One was that his healing spells had the opposite effect so instead of a healing word he did a harming word. I tried to voice a slight complaint but he just steamrolled his addict cleric in no matter what. The campaign later fell apart, not exactly because of him, but many other players shared my frustrations, so it definitely had something to do with it. Judges, am I wrong to be frustrated with this character and this player who refused to help us in who was a really incredible campaign (with one of my favorite character I have ever made) or was he on another level of character creation/commitment that I have yet to reach?

Prof

To the esteemed justices Tanner and the Axfords and oh hey there lil guy who let you into a court room? A couple of years ago I ran a Star wars campaign using SW5e I was a little inexperienced DMing at the time and one of my players wanted to play a droid (magna guard) barbarian, I was like sure. The campaign was a short one at level 10 and he came into session 1 with 36 AC, resistance to all damage and 6 reactions which he stated is "perfectly legal" I said no, no 1000 times no. I cut his ac to 22, gave him vulnerability to a type of damage from that system and I don't remember what I did to his reactions. We finished that campaign and still play together to this day, to this day I still raz him about this insane PC and he still defends it. Judges should I put this matter to bed? If it was perfectly legal should I have left it? We await your accurate judgement! PS he has stated he's willing to explain his build

Adam Fux

To the esteemed justices and the bouncing baby bailiff Jake. I present to you the case of the over the top player. I dm a game for three of my longtime friends who are all wonderful and very invested in our game. However recently one of my players has become a little ~too~ invested. Her Druid pc had a big character moment several sessions back and ever since she will not stop texting out of game about her PCs thoughts and feelings. She has been journaling in character on our shared google doc and asking me to read each entry. Last weekend she texted me 8 times about the game even though she knew I was on vacation. One time I told her I that was too busy to talk dnd and she responded with a 3 paragraph in character text. I love my friend and am grateful that she loves our game but I am exhausted. I have tried to gently let her know that I’m getting overwhelmed but she is l not picking up on it. Judges am I being an ungrateful dm or is my friend simply doing too much? I humbly await your ruling.

JensLyndelle_Comedy1

To the honorable justices Axford, Murphy, and Tanner, and to the bailiff Jack and may it please The Court. I present to you the case of the problem player and the deck of many things: A few years ago I joined a group through a local game store. It was a lot of players first time playing D&D so the first few months were slow as people learned the rules and boundaries of the game (to be expected). After a few months though, it was clear one player was never going to catch up. We were playing online during covid and often times he would obviously be spaced and clearly not paying attention and his combat turns typically took upward of 5 minutes. Our DM introduced the Deck of Many Things around level 5 and a few of us drew from it and lo and behold, the problem player pulled a knight card. This obviously exacerbated the problem in question. A few of us spoke to the player and our DM about the problem and he proceeded to discuss with the player multiple times both in game and out to no avail. Fast forward 6 months later and the player had gotten his knight captured and refused to leave them behind. We snuck up on the band of cultists who were in a cave and instead of planning a solution the player dove in, Leroy Jenkins style. A few of us privately decided enough was enough in the group chat and two people cast fire ball across the entire encounter, killing both the problem player and their knight. We revived the player and distracted them for over a minute of in-game time so we could no longer revive the knight. The player was mildly annoyed but got over it and continued to be a problem until I left the group about a year later. So judges, were we wrong to kill the knight? Was there a better way to deal with this problem? I humbly await your judgement.

Probably an NPC

to the church of dice Christ, the wonderful cardinals and the choir boy, i have a grave confession to make and release my dice of burden when i began playing it was with a DM who was new to 5e, whereas i had been reading and playing it for awhile. while trying to steal information we needed i had to move from the town square to just outside the house of the person we were stealing from, but alas there was a guard who was trying to arrest me for starting a little fire. i used the spell command to force him to his knees screaming. While i knew this spell would only last a round, i said it lasted for a minute. i feel myself a sinner due to misleading my fine DM in this, and need penance. i fell i cant use this spell again.

Lord Zoltan

To the lovely court and the slightly less lovable bailiff. I bring not a case but a shoutout to someone very special. I turned 21 this past week and for my birthday party my dad made a Trinyvale themed script for a game called Blood on the Clocktower (think mafia mixed with one night ultimate werewolf). He and I took weeks to come up with the best combination of roles that fit each of the characters and my family played several test games before the party just to make sure everything went smoothly. He has not only gave me this special homebrew gift while balancing his busy schedule, but has also dealt with my constant out of nowhere references since he introduced me to the show about two years ago. I beg the court to give him accolades on top of what he has already received because I feel like he does not understand just how much he is appreciated. P.S. No one, other than my family members, was familiar with NADDPOD but everyone loved the confusion and embodied the chaotic energy perfectly.

Patrick Ferris

To the principled judges and the putrid bailiff, Andrew: A few years back I ran a Curse of Strahd campaign for some friends where I tried my damndest to get at least one player to betray the party. Being the seductive DM that I am, one PC actually took the bait. The barbarian of the party, Mashi, accepted the dark gift of vampirism, much to the parties dismay. At the time, my group followed a rule that so long as only one player was missing from the table, we would continue the session without them (5 player total). The session following Mashi’s infection, their player could not make it. I hadn’t planned for the infection to take hold quickly, so I expected Mashi to be around for at least a few more sessions. Honorable judges, the other party members IMMEDIATELY began scrutinizing Mashi at the beginning of the session. I, not wanting to fully roleplay one of my player’s characters, had Mashi run away and hide. The party pursued. Relentlessly. I was forced to play as Mashi, being berated by all of the party, before ultimately being told to leave and never come back. I tried to draw out the situation long enough for it to pick up in the next session, but the party would not back down, and Mashi’s player started next week with a new character sheet. Judges, wtf? Luckily we’re are all friends at the table, and though I still get razzed on occasion for allowing a player to miss such a crucial character moment, we’ve since moved on to bigger and better campaigns.

feoran97

To the Ultimate Supreme Crit Justices, and the Baliff, I think their name is Tina, I bring the case of the one shot catapult. I am a long term player and DM (over 5 years) and I'm playing with a new DM and two new players (I'm a player in this campaign). The DM asks me regularly for advice, as he is new to the game and I have more experience. One of the new players (Banjo the tree frog wizard) was attempting to make ammo for the catapult spell by having the artificer make essentially shrapnel rounds that would burst into 6 projectiles upon impact. The problem was, he was trying to calculate the damage as 3D8 for each piece. This would make the damage 18D8 for a first level spell, and up to 66D8 damage for a 9th level spell. I argued that it would not splinter and split that damage, to which he brought up ballistic rounds for a firearm. I argued that the catapult spell propels something 90 ft in 6 seconds, or about 10 miles per hour, which wouldn't be fast enough to do the same kind of damage. His argument was that I was crushing his creativity and couldn't compete with my damage so was feeling left out in combat (I am a lvl 3 rogue and level 7 gunslinger inspired by deadeye). Am I wrong to get involved and save my new DM from setting a precedent that this was OK, or should I have just stayed out of it and let Banjo have his nuke? I humbly await your almighty wisdom and judgment.

DropPocket

To the immaculate judges of the high crit I greet thee! And I guess hi to the bailiff too. I come to you to ask for advice. Last year I started a homebrew game and DM'd for my two college friends. This was my first time as either a player or DM but I had listened to numerous DnD podcasts such as naddpod. Their first encounter was with a group of "frat boy skeletons" that nearly killed them both. The next encounter was a bugbear and two goblins that also nearly felled them. Nervous that I would TPK the two man team I gave them some rare weapons. Well, my issue is that they are now too powerful because of this! The level 6 paladin of the group dealt 126 damage in one round to an earth elemental boss due to a crit and using a damage type the elemental was vulnerable to. My question is this, should I just take away their good weapons so that future combat can be more intense and if so how should I in a narratively satisfying way?

Lorelei G.

To the noble justices Murphy, Axford, and Tanner and the effervescent bailiff Axford, I beg of thee to hear my case. I have been on the receiving end of many a questionable DM ruling, but I cannot cast judgement until I turn myself into the custody of the court for what I have done. I am a DM running my first campaign, which has recently just passed its 50th session. A few months ago, we had a Christmas special, centered around the Festival of Wintertide, in which the party was hired to deliver presents from the local baron to various important figures in town. One of these figures was the town's treasurer. Finding the front door locked, our fairy barbarian got dressed up as a Wintertide spirit (in his words, a drag Jack Frost), and weent to deliver the wrapped gift, finding the room occupied only by a sleeping little girl, who woke up in wonder upon seeing the Wintertide spirit. They had a brief, cute interaction, and our barbarian gave the gift to the little girl, hoping that whatever it was was child-safe. I thought it was a funny thought, so I rolled a d100 to see how child friendly it was. Justices, I rolled a 1. Suddenly covered in DM sweat, I scrambled, and my first thought was that the box contained a vial of NADDPod's own arcaine, and that the treasurer had an arcaine habit that the baron knew about. The little girl started to pour out a line of arcaine onto the table, excited to try it since she had seen Daddy sniff the funny blue powder but he had never let her try it. I gave ample time for the fairy barbarian to intervene. He did not, instead choosing to watch and flex. I rolled the luck check for the little girl as she took the arcaine. Your honours, she got a 1. And that was how the Festival of Wintertide ended up with a little girl getting turned to a pile of ashes. The fairy barbarian booked it out of there and never told the rest of the party, and the party left the next day. This has haunted me, justices and baililiff. I should have thought about it for two seconds longer and known that my shitheads would not intervene, and I should not have made the little girl take the arcaine, as funny as I thought it was. I beg of thee to punish me as you see fit. PS: Hate the show, never listened to it.

DJ Matty Lil Crits

To the Wife Guys of the Supreme Crit, and dutiful wife worm Axford, I present the case of the Neglectful Husband, may it please the court. We were a group of lv 7s fighting a lich and his minions. the DMPC cleric had thrust her sword into the lich's chest, absorbing his magic so we would take only half damage to make the battle manageable. Knowing the lich couldn't remove the sword, my bard cast heat metal on the sword like the good little meta-gamer I am. After 2 rounds of my bullshit, my DM ruled that I'd heated the sword enough to melt it, even though that's not how the spell works. I was fine with it, and took it as a compliment for my spell usage. We won and even completely skipped the second phase thanks to the DMPC cleric's father, a Duke of Hell, dragging the boss to hell for us. Neat! My actual grievance is that on the way home, the cleric's husband, an ancient silver dragon and my DM's pathfinder character, arrived to guide us home. As we celebrated our victory, the dragon cornered my character, demanding I buy his wife a replacement sword, as the sword I melted had been an anniversary present. I told him "I'm still wearing leather armor, I can't afford a new legendary class sword". He said, "Don't worry, you can pay it off later." Judges, I do not want to buy him a sword. If he wants his wife to have a sword to defend her, I recommend he be more present in her life. What say you? I humbly await the wisdom of her worm-li-ness and the compassion of the court.

Ben Schmitz

To the glorious and radiant judges, Murphy, Axford, and Tanner, and also some other jamoke is there maybe... I bring you the case of the solidarity mushroom stamp. A pathfinder campaign with friends years ago found me playing with a hippy fire based druid. She believed in rebirth and the care for the forest through regular burns... she was also a nudist. One fateful session, she simply refused to put on clothes after her hot bath, much to the concern of the tavern owner and all of the npcs trying to have a quiet drink. This quickly escalated to the inn-keeper calling the guards in response to her obstinate nudity. My half-orc Barbarian, Fritters, chose to also strip to the nude in solidarity with my parties druid. Fritters, being the classically illiterate and low mind, high physical stats, had been decided earlier in the campaign through no fault of my own to be rather well endowed in his manhood. Anyways, the bar brawl broke out, and when asked to roll an attack with his "improvised weapon", rolled a confirmed crit on the captain of the guard. Barbarian abilities in tow, this was more than enough to knock this npc unconscious, and Fritters and the druid pushed back the guards through the sheer force of nakedness and freedom of expression. Long story short, the DM never ran a game again, and partially blamed Fritters and his mushroom stamp for driving him to madness. Am I in the wrong? Should I have left our nude druid out to dry? Or should the DM have taken his meat beats like a champ and pushed through? I humbly await your verdict.

Kyle Corbett

To the mostly honorable justices and the bailiff patron saint of multi-classing. I present to you the case of the party versus the pyromaniac druid. I’m a cleric in a long running DND campaign with myself a DM and five other players. We had someone step down due to childbirth recently and in the meantime the DM’s partner is filling in as our level 8 wildfire druid. When we first started she was content to be a quiet druid who like warm cups of tea, cut to today she buys all available grease and oil and attempts to turn every social and combat encounter into a true Dante’s Peak scenario and argues playfully and constantly with her DM partner about how fire spells should work and the DM often acquiesces. I’m meeting with the DM Saturday to “ go over notes“. I don’t wanna leave this campaign and I don’t necessarily need the Dre to stop playing. I just need them to stop leaning so hard into the idea that their class wants to see the world burn.

Desk Plant

To the illuminated judges and to the bright bulb boy, bailiff John. I present to you the case of the two effective rogues. This was my very first dnd campaign I was a part of and we had around 5 players. The main point is that one of the other players and myself were both playing rogues. Then an assassin rogue and myself a mastermind rogue. During one of our sessions we encountered a sleeping Chimera. As to not wake the Chimera, the other rogue and I both agreed to stealth forward and see if we could get a nice surprise round of sneak attacks. We both lined up on other side of the sleeping Chimera and attacked. With our combined damage and it being surprised we were able to take down the Chimera and collect the treasure it was guarding. This is when the real trouble sets in. We were playing in an experience based campaign so while we were distributing loot between everyone, the monk in our party asked how much experience did everyone get. The dm said that the rogue and I gained experience, but that no one else did because they didn’t attack the creature. The party protested, myself included, because we did not want to set this precedent of if you don’t attack then you don’t get experience. The dm ultimately allowed us to split the experience with the rest of the party. So I ask you judges, were we in the wrong to want the rest of the party to get experience along with us or should we have lamented to the dm’s ruling. I humbly await the wisdom of the crit court and also bailiff…. Jack I wanna say.

Comrade Capybara

To the Supreme Crit Jobbers and Big Boss Bailiff, Jake the Break Hurtwitz: I was invited by my DM to join some friends of his from other parties to try out 2.5e and play some module called The Tomb of Horrors. Throughout the session one of the players, let's call him Deuce, spent most of the time arguing with/talking over the other PCs during our turns to force people into making the decisions he wanted. There were 8 of us at the table, one of whom was Deuce's wife, another was his daughter, and the were friends who had been playing D&D with Deuce in some capacity since the early 80s. During our session, Deuce actively antagonized the players at the table when he didn't approve of our turns. Eventually, his wife and I failed a check that caused some traps to spring, separating our party. Deuce exploded and began screaming insults at the table, his wife and adult child included. When he stood over me in my seat and called me an idiot, I decided it was his time to learn a bit about me. Deuce thought he was going to be bullying another RPG nerd that wouldn't stand up to him, he did not account for one of the PCs he'd be playing with that day being a member of pro-wrestling's own Anoa'i family. In front of his wife, child, and life long friends, I cut a full Jacob Fatu promo on Deuce. Nobody attempted to defend Deuce or persuade me to stop my verbal onslaught. By the time I finished, he looked like he had taken a Samoan Spike to the soul. I played the rest of that session glaring directly into his eyes and asking if he had an opinion he'd like to share before I ended my turn...lo and behold: he was fresh out of opinions for the rest of the day. After we wrapped, I thanked my DM and let him know I wouldn't be returning for future sessions. He thanked me for checking Deuce's behavior, because he had apparently been acting this way for over 30 years and I was the first person to push back. So I ask you: was I in the right to go full CM Punk Pipepomb on Deuce? I feel like showing enough restraint to not yeet his raggedy ass through the game table with a Rock Bottom should at least earn me a reduced sentence, but I leave that decision in the hands of the court.

Cristian

Hello to the amazing bailiff Axford and her cronies. If it pleases the court, I present the case of the DM-assigned PCs Last year, both my boyfriend and our roommate joined a campaign hoping to make new friends in the community. They’ve been playing for over a year now, but recently during a climactic moment the players were all told that they experienced a lore important flashback. The next session, the DM handed the party new character sheets with everything but the names filled in. My boyfriend has started to complain that while it was an exciting change of pace at first, they just had their 12th session and there’s no sign of them going back to their characters. To make it worse, one example of the assigned characters is a lvl 7 fighter with a strength score of 14. Bailiff Axford, how do we even behind to approach this situation? We don’t want to make the DM feel like he’s doing a bad job, but a big pull to dnd, at least in our opinion, is to roleplay characters you want to /choose to play.

whitewinespritzer

To the Honored Justices and the Razzie-Winning Bailiff Jorts I present the case of the player’s hot boss. This dispute arose between two players at my table. For clarity's sake let’s call them Albin and Pendergreens. Pendergreens mentioned offhandedly at a session that he think’s Albin’s boss is hot. Albin got uncomfortable, and asked Pendergreens to stop it. Seeing that he was getting a rise out of someone, Pendergreens really hammered on this over and over for the rest of the session. He now brings it up once or twice a session, and after the last session yelled something about Albin’s boss being hot as she was pulling out of the driveway. Albin texted my girlfriend later that night to tell her that she was uncomfortable with the comments about their boss being hot. My girlfriend said it should be my responsibility as DM to step in and get Pendergreens to knock it off. On one hand, I’m a little over it with Pendergreens running a non-joke into the ground, but I’m also wondering if I need to be brought into this to put a stop to what is, in the end, a pretty feather-weight razz. What say you, justices? Do I have a responsibility here, or can I just let Pendergreens tire himself out?

Michael Griffith

To the Esteemed & Exaltant Arbiters of Dice Christ. To the Magnanimous Mouthpiece of RNG Jesus. To the ever beloved Justices and Balif (with one exception... And you know which one ((PS. It's not Axford, she's flawless and beyond reproach))) I come before your Eminences this day to Humbly seek your presence and say "Hi! Hope you have a great week!" That's all

SlimMaculate

To the honorable justices and the unprofessional thirst trap bailiff, I bring the case of “Waiting for Advantage”. The DM ran a session where our party of four entered a mysterious warehouse through four separate doors. Each player was locked into their own lane and had to complete a series of challenges to progress further in. The first challenge was making it through a hallway which had a hidden pit trap. The 2nd challenge was a room which contained only a locked chest which contained a quest item. Every player in the party had their own set of thieves’ tools. I, a thief rouge, was able to open the chest instantly. The party’s fighter, Ronnie, struggled to open his chest. After several failed attempts to lock pick the chest, Ronnie asked if he could get advantage on the next check if he announced that “My character takes her time...” before making the check. The DM said no but instead let him use an Athletics check to use his war hammer to open the chest. After some unsuccessful rolls, Ronnie managed to open the chest using athletics. After the session Ronnie argued that he should have gotten advantage on the thieves’ tools check when said his character took her time; stating that an action to use thieves’ tool only took 6 seconds. Should Ronnie gotten advantage on the roll for “taking his time” after a couple of failed checks? I patiently await the judges’ opinion. PS: Everybody at the party had a speaking stone like a device. Could my character have given Ronnie’s character a help action over voice communication for the thieves tools check?

Nile

The Case of the Fireball Scroll Incident To the most honorable judges of the Supreme Crit, and to Bailiff Jake, whose voice echoes with the authority of a nat 1, I bring you this most arcane of tragedies—told not in anger, but in the smoldering ashes of betrayal. It was deep in the dungeon’s third layer—dank, grim, and thick with the scent of mold, tension, and eldritch decay. Our supplies were low. Spirits, lower still. Yet we pressed on. Until… The Incident. The wizard—our wizard—keeper of scrolls, counter of spells, wearer of twelve unnecessarily long belts—stood abruptly. “I require a moment,” he said. Calm. Poised. Deceitful. As if he were stepping out for tea… and not treachery. There was a rustle. A flicker of torchlight. And then—the unmistakable sound of parchment… being unfurled in despair. Then silence. And then… peace. Too much peace. He returned. Unburdened. Moments later, we learned the truth: The scroll of Fireball—our most treasured, our most powerful, our “if-things-go-south-we-blow-them-north” scroll—was gone. Not used in glorious battle. Not sacrificed to protect the innocent. No. It had been used… to wipe. When the DM asked “did you really use the scroll to wipe?” he said “Yes, It wasn’t even that high-level.” What followed was a 30-minute argument, increasingly heated No one helped the wizard for the rest of the session. Our cleric refused to heal him. Our rogue stopped sharing loot. And the bard—used Bardic Inspiration on every single party member… except him. Your Honors. I ask you: Was this the act of a man in crisis or were my fellow party members justified in not helping the wizard?

Sam C

To the honorable justices and Amir’s friend jork. I present a case of the two-party affair. I have always been the de facto DM because I can actually read. Personally, I love it but sometimes it’s a lot of work to come up with original ideas as a DM. I started a campaign in 2020 with long-time friends and experienced players. They were an evil party who called themselves “The Cabal.” We ran weekly for 2 years until I moved away for grad school. But we still managed to finish the campaign each player got their “happy” ending: A despot giant barbarian king commanding the world’s largest army, a snake witch with a nation of warlocks contracted to her, an oathbreaker lich leading a cult of corrupted knights, a gloomstalker assassin who became the most lethal woman in the realm, and a whispers bard who controls the global economy. After a year of not playing I made some new friends that wanted to learn how to play D&D. I was excited to DM again but I was also busy with classes. So I recycled the world ruled by The Cabal and used my former PCs as the big bad NPCs that my new Heroic Party (classic fighter, wizard, cleric) would rise up against. They were hooked after the first session. Eventually they got to the first boss lair, the Bard’s vault of stolen treasure located in a pocket dimension. That’s when I decided to invite the original PC to Zoom in and reprise his character, something he was really excited to do. The session ended great and everyone had a blast. The heroic party returned all the stolen loot and the bard still escaped to cause more trouble in the future, but not before it was revealed that all The Cabal members were connected as a way to invite my old players to future sessions. That was when my new party asked the bard “how did you play OP’s villain so well?” That’s when I realized I never fully explained to anyone that the villains were individually created by my old players. So the bard began to razz me and told them that I’ve been reusing elements from my old campaign. Now I’ll admit that I never explicitly stated that I recycled elements, but I also felt like this new campaign was more of a continuation rather than a retcon. But the new party seemed disappointed that I wasn’t completely original with their campaign. The bard also messaged the old group about this and their reactions ranged from playful razzing to the snake witch calling me a “plagiarizing cock-suckle” for reusing her character. So am I guilty for reusing assets without permission? Or am I being wrongfully razzed? I subject myself to your fair judgement and if I’m found guilty I will eat the Frozen 2 Blu-ray bundle with a fork and knife.

Ben Graham

To the esteemed justices and the baby boy Bailiff, I present the case of the Wannabe Vampire Rogue. I’m a relatively new DM running a home brew campaign about 14 sessions in. Things are going well, but I have a gripe with my wizard. Not too long ago, the wizard player blindsided me with an awkward social interaction. He invited someone else to the campaign (without asking me first). When I asked this new person what they wanted to play, he said “a vampire rogue.” I flat out refused this, but they insisted upon it, saying he could be carried around during the day in a box like in demon slayer, and wear a big cloak. I said that was dumb as fuck. The campaign isn’t even remotely vampire related. Eventually, I got through to them, and I haven’t spoken much to the dude since he’s an acquaintance, so I sort of hoped any prospect of him wanting to join the campaign was gone and we could just not bring it up. But recently, my wizard again, asks me “why don’t we’d get old mate in the campaign?” Justice Murphy, do I need to keep being friends with this wizard? The vampire rogue is dumb as fuck, but it’s the wizards continual nagging to add someone to the campaign that I barely know, that I have the most issue with. I await your judgement. Sorry if this is written shit I just woke up lol. PS. The Jake being a judge bit was funny for a while, but I’m glad to see it’s over.

Garrett Myers

A submission from a PC in my group (she doesn’t have Patreon): Dearest Supreme Crit, I am writing in because my DM submitted this scenario to you and I was hoping you might weigh in. At our most recent session we were visiting my character’s hometown (my character: Brunhilda Hillhaven, a halfling Barbarian). This trip went massively awry and ended with my accidental, in game husband blowing up several buildings and possibly killing my neighbors. At that point we were fleeing the town and looking at a considerable flying time on our drake (Pumpkin) to the next town. In character I ran up to Ed (my accidental husband) and narrated that I knocked him out with non-lethal damage. My DM asked for a role and I obliged and rolled a NAT 20! My DM then went on to ask if I really was going to take another player to zero hit points. I told him that I didn’t want to kill him, only knock him unconscious and my DM insisted that I would have to take his hit points to zero to do that. At that point I was fuming. I had rolled a NAT 20 and strongly felt that since we weren’t in combat and we had plenty of time to rest before the next town that I should be able to just knock him unconscious and he would come to in a few min. My DM disagreed. All this back and forth completely ruined my character's moment and the vibe at the table. I was so upset that I left the table for a breather. When I came back we decided to finish out the session and it was fine however I feel like my DM took my NAT 20 away from me and ruined my character's defining moment. Did the DM take these things from my character or was I wrong in thinking this was a rule of cool moment. As always we humbly await your response. PS - they were still in initiative. Love and kisses, The Cheeky DM

Tavitafish

To the extremely honorable Rian Urphy, I present the case of the Overly Healthy Monk Mobster. I was running a heavily home brewed campaign, where the players hp couldn't go higher than third level. I wanted the homebrew firearms I made to still have a punch so I didn't have to throw 600 guys at them to have a chance. However, one time they got into a fight with a mob leader, and he had a lot of hp. My party argued that wasn't fair that he got to have way more hp then them, and having monk abilities. I argued that he wasn't a pc, so it was fine. They relented and then shot him with a stinger missile killing him instantly in the same session, so I think they were fine with it. But I have to ask, should I have limited his hp as well, or was it ok that he had a little over double the healthiest player? (Ps, the game ended with the players stealing a nuke and forming their own nation)

Moni K

To the honourable justice league and the Jaker. It's our penultimate campaign session and we are racing across city rooftops to stop an evil kings coronation. A bad roll sends our warlock plummeting through the ceiling of an antique store, knocking the owner out cold. An elderly elf enters, assumes we work there and insists that we will know exactly what to get her husband for his 300th birthday. We try to get out of it, but our GM is very persistent, so we assume this must be important. It was half an hour of suggestions and asking their hobbies, only to hear "but I got them new space darts for their 298th birthday" etc. This did not lead to information, special items or even gold from this old crone, and our GM later admitted to crowdsourcing ideas for their dad's birthday. Should our GM be punished for this mild goose chase?

Alexander Powers

Honorable justices, handsome and magnanimous bailiff Jake, I bring before you the case of the dice blessed villain: I am the DM for a campaign that has been meeting weekly for about 6 months now with 6 players. 4 of these characters were worked on for weeks before the campaign, have rich backstories grounded in my homebrew world, and played very well together during our session 0. However, we had a 5th that had to drop out at the last minute and as a result we accidentally gained not 1 but 2 new players at the last minute. These 2 players made their characters last-minute and have very little grounding or investment in the world. This has resulted in one of the players- the sorcerer, who has no real motivation other than to restart a war in order to die in glorious battle- being an absolute menace. He's taunting high level enemies and drawing their ire, desecrating the corpses of enemies to "send a message," lying *constantly,* sometimes at great risk to the party, etc etc. This lies in direct contrast to our classically stiff and dutiful paladin, who of course does not approve at all. Worse, he often pulls the other last-minute addition, our, warlock (and sometimes our cleric as well) into his antics, and the player for the paladin has started to become a little frustrated feeling like the schoolteacher ruining everyone else's fun and keeping everyone in line. It crossed over from all fun and games to legitimately frustrating for him when the sorcerer tried to secretly enlist the paladin's 11-year-old daughter into his spy network, potentially putting her directly in harm's way. This move is making it *very* difficult for our paladin to justify wanting to continue running with this party and is risking a PvP scenario. This is the kicker: I have tried repeatedly to punish the sorcerer for his wanton behavior, but every time I do he rolls *magnificently* to get him out of trouble. The most recent time he was in a scenario where his constant lying could have landed him in serious trouble, *seven* nat 20s were rolled in his favor in one session, making his lies a resounding success and only encouraging him further. Justices, I bring this question before you: how do I get this dice-blessed menace to tone it down without ruining the fun at the table? Am I a bad DM for not being able to successfully balance this at-odds party? Is the sorcerer at fault for being such a ne'er-do-well? Is my paladin being a big boring killjoy? I eagerly await your harsh and uncompromising justice.

Keegan Plank

Howdy to the omniscient judges and the cutie patootie bailiff Jacob Sartorious!! Today I bring to you the case of the Druid Craft Toot. I recently started DMing a virtual campaign with my mom, sister, brother, and significant other, all of us newbs to DND aside from my brother. I was under the impression that things were going swimmingly until I learned that my sister had my mom create her character sheet using ChatGPT. This set the precedent for her participation; during our first session, she had my mom recite her character’s introduction, my brother directing her character, and essentially zoned out for the entire 3hr session. We are now 5 sessions in, and she has yet to be able to roll a d20 on her own, doesn’t listen to storylines that relate to her directly, and walks off unannounced to eat snacks or walk her dog for extended periods of time mid session. Her lack of participation has become so palpable that other players have started to feel that their gameplay is being negatively affected. And that’s where my case begins; my S.O, noticing my sister’s lack of attention, cast Druid Craft to produce a fart smell and announced that my sister’s character had ripped ass in the middle of a tavern full of their acquaintances. I didn’t ask for the parameters of the cantrip or for a roll as I was increasingly annoyed and I let the scene play out. By the time my sister announced that she wanted to prove her innocence, several minutes of PC and NPC ribbing had gone by unnoticed by her so I didn’t allow her to make any persuasion check, which effectively coined her as a crop duster to the townsfolk. My question is; am I terribly evil for letting my S.O use Druid Craft in this way without an ability check while also refusing my sister the opportunity to prove her innocence? I sit humbly before the judges and await your ruling. Love, the humble tootmiser

Ryz

Hello to judges, bailiffs and those who switch between. I bring you the Case of Better off Dead than Fed. I played a drug dealing Druid in a campaign with some friends in college. During this campaign we fought several groups of bandits, who were had been struggling to survive due to a food scarcity across the land. My party killed the vast majority of them in the typically brutal fashion, but I captured one of them to be a servant to me and my plants. I provided him both food and water, with some discussion via the DM got him very addicted to my smokable plants to ensure his continued compliance (The DM let me treat this as a Charm Spell with my spell DC, on the condition that it only worked on this single captive who I was able to force smoke my stash on a constant basis over the course of multiple days). Well the party Paladin, correctly identified this as a form of slavery but expressed that this was morally wrong and not something their character would allow. I pointed out that all of us including the Paladin had been brutally murdering my human’s companions, friends and probably family for weeks. And while I fully admit that his free will has been subsumed by my addictive plants, he was in fact getting food and water, as opposed to being decapitated. While I fully admit that slavery is bad outside of a TTRPG, so is murder and I don’t think my Druid was actually being more immoral than the rest of the party who just killed everyone they met. The Paladin argued that we had only killed bandits who attacked us first as opposed to my enslaving one of them which was premeditated and planned. The DM didn’t care either way but the Paladin threatened to leave the party if the issue wasn’t addressed because their character could not morally stand to watch this happen. So I doubled down and stated the Druid would leave the party if he was forced to kill his plant slave, out of the weird idea that providing welfare and enjoyable drugs is more evil that just murdering people. The DM ended up having my slave killed in the next battle, I think just because he was tired of this conversation. But I ask you judges: Is keeping a human as a slave more morally wrong than just slaughtering them? Was I being truly too evil for a Paladin to handle?

Daniel Iovino

To the benevolent justices of the Crit, and the ever dependable bailiff, I bring the case of the Out of Tune Wizard. I currently play in a campaign DM'ed by a good friend of mine. It's his first campaign, and I've tried to make sure that I help without ever backseat DM'ing during his games. In our most recent session, we were tasked with infiltrating a masquerade ball. Before the ball, our DM narrated a scene in which his girlfriend -the party wizard - managed to stumble upon the musician for the ball, and took his invitation. Once we made our way into the ball, she promptly announced that as the musician for the evening, she would be leaving and entering through a different door, and then insisted that she must "warm up". Our DM had on a playlist of Bridgerton-esque classical covers of pop songs playing, and the wizard/girlfriend insisted that she had to sing for real. Justices, what followed was roughly 10 minutes and 3 songs of out-of-tune belting, which we were unable to escape. Our DM didn't make her roll for performance, and instead explained how he would have the IRL singing entirely take the place of a performance roll, likening it to the way someone might get inspiration. This ground the game to a halt and I know that our third party member was equally unhappy to be subject to this impromptu concert. Also, despite splitting up from the group to go sing, she kept insisting that she would "just know the plan", even though we discussed our heist while she announced that she would be singing. We tried explaining how since she voluntarily chose to leave on her singing side-quest, she wouldn't know how to reach us, based on how our DM was narrating the ball and where we were - but these explanations fell on deaf ears. Oh, wise Justices, I implore you - what must I do? I don't want to backseat DM or cause friction, and up until this point, the campaign we've played has been fun. Should my DM explain the concept of meta-gaming, or am I just a grumpy gus? I await your fair and just ruling.

Meghan

Honorable justices and the disgraced bailiff Jake (you know what you did) I bring the case of more than inspired world building. Recently my player has told me that they started reading a series they’ve seen on my book shelf (mistborn) and I had a small internal panic realizing the many NPCs and hooks I’m using from the series in my campaign. I decided to ask them to wait until after out campaign and was razzed for being a book banner. So I ask the justices, are we thieving DMs out of line for asking a player not to ruin all my not so subtle stealing? Or am I justified in keeping my inspiration barred until post campaign?

Fiel

To the exceptional justices and the barely cromulent bailiff Mike, I would like to request a ruling on the ethics of slaying Sahaugin hatchlings. A few years ago, we were playing through the Ghosts of Saltmarsh and in the lair of the Sahaugin who are monstrous fish-men. We encountered a swarm of Sahaugin Hatchlings that were clearly aggressive and wanted to kill us, and initiative was rolled. The Paladin, however, objected to battling them— because Sahaugins are sapient, he argued that hatchlings didn’t know better and killing them was tantamount to killing children. The DM argued that at this point in their life-cycle they essentially just monsters at this point in their, and the other players argued it was self-defense. My character, a fisherman by trade, argued that “a fish is a fish,” which also ended up being contentious. We argued about this for between 15 minutes to an hour, depending on who you ask. Judges, cromulent and otherwise, what’s your verdict on this? Is killing hatchlings as cruel as killing younglings? Are they just monsters? Is a fish a fish? I humbly await your ruling.

Simone Munck Nielsen

To the honorable justices and the lovely bailiff Jake. This is more a question and the possibility of an injustice. I'm playing my first game of D&D, and recently had my first death saving throw. Not only did I have to roll on my turn, but also the moment I went down. Is that normal? I've learned D&D from Dimension 20 and you guys, and I know it might have some differences since you are a performative show but this seems like a big thing? The DM is new at DM'ing, but is being assisted by his friend who is a veteran DM and does a lot of homebrew. Can I say something about this or is it just the DM's call? Love, Simone from Denmark PS: Please come back to Europe, we would love to have you <3

Chip

To the honorable justices and the lowly baebae Jay. I bring you the case of the non-dramatic language. I've been playing D&D with multiple groups for almost 10 years and we're having a blast. However, something has consistently been an issue for me as a DM that has to play big bad evil people on the regular: Our game is in our native language, swiss german. Now, swiss german is a very unserious dialect. This is a sentiment that is widely shared, even by our neighbouring countries. It sounds cute, silly and does not work for epic fantasy roleplay. This isn't noticable when we talk amongst ourselves, since it's just how we speak all the time, but it does become noticably silly when I try to pull of dramatic moments or evil monologues in-character. I have brought this up to my players and they have agreed that it undermines the seriousness of my evil characters. It just doesn't seem to pull the same weight as with languages that we're used to hearing in media, like english or german. So I humbly ask the court, am I wrong to feel insecure about my swiss villains? Should I embrace my linguistic origins or only create villains that don't speak from now on?

Barney

Honorable Justi', Jake-y Jake & the Funky Bunch. Look under here, under the podium. I have a Bat problem. In our Curse of Strahd campaign, we find our party clearing out a werewolf den. When sending the bat familiar (Bat-Aranth) to scout, hiding werewolves shot him down. The issue, he has blindsight via echolocation and these furry fluffs were hiding near the stalagmite ridden shadowy walls. Not behind any amount of significant cover. When I brought up to the dm that the bat would have seen them, he said they were hidden and that echolocation is not seeing... so line of sight means squat. No check, no rolls. My question to you! Was my bat unjustly murdered by a god who refused to let him see, his echo-y-way, or do I need to pay my 10 gold in materials and apologize to my batty boy?!

Reilly Willoughby

Honerable Justices and the (if we're being nice to the Baliff) ruggedly handsome Baliff Jake/(if we're being mean to the Baliff) that Juan guy with lukewarm boiled hotdog energy. I am in a Curse of Strahd campaign with my DM and 4 other players. Before we started, the DM laid some table rules, banning some spells and subclasses, including banning all summoning spells because they "big down combat too much." While I accepted the rules at the time, in a recent story arc, we spent several sessions saving NPC townsfolk and sending them back to a stronghold. After literal months of this, we went back to the stronghold to defend the NPCs from an onslaught of enemies. When we started combat, at one point there were 14 enemy monsters on the field. They swooped in and killed several of the NPCs we spent months saving. Playing a druid, I asked if I could use a spell like summon woodland creatures to try to distract the enemies from the NPCs we had grown attached to, and he reiterated "No summon spells, they slow down combat." I retorted "OK, but your 14 monsters on the field are slowing down combat way more than my summon spell would" and he got very defensive. At one point, I think we spent 20 minutes of him describing the monster acting, killing NPCs without a single one of us having a turn. I ask you, most honorable supreme crit, is this fair? Or should I have been allowed my summons?

DJ Mikey-B

To the local newsworthy Supreme Crit Justices and the baliff who is in the background making lewd gestures to the camera, I present to you the case of the malicious metagaming DM. Justices, I come to you as a player scorned by my DM who metagames against those who "outplay" him. Some examples include the several times NPCs would automatically succeed on Insight checks after 30+ Deception rolls becuase they "already knew who we were," giving most enemies the ability to silence casters whenever they started doing well in combat, and the time he sent the party on a 6-session dungeon crawl where fire and thunder magic would cause the dungeon to collapse and automatically force a TPK as revenge for the party bard (me) and artificer finished a 20+ enemy encounter with Fireball and Shatter in 1 round. While those may be chalked up to simply making encounters harder, this next example is pure malicious metagaming. During a recent session where the party leveled up, above the table, I told everyone that I was taking the Metamagic Adept feat to give my bard Subtle Spell and Transmute Spell in order to have something to work around the limitations on magic we had ran into. Less than an hour later, our party was accosted by the BBEG's minions in hopes that we would become his prisoners. When I said that I was going to use Subtle Spell to kick off combat with a surprise round, the DM said, "nope, they counterspelled you." When I argued that Subtle Spell should be difficult if not impossible to notice much less counterspell, especially without a check, my DM said that the NPCs had been spying on us and knew all of our abilities, including my metamagic (which again, I had not yet used or talked about in-character). To avoid grinding the session to a halt, I didn't argue with the DM and asked to talk to them after. When I talked with my DM and told them that it felt unfair with how his NPCs had knowledge they shouldn't, he shrugged and said, "DMs have to metagame or else the players win." Justices, have I been wrongfully metagamed against or am I simply a Jr. Executive in Justice Murphy's salt mine? P.S. - In the process of writing this submission, I preemptively took Justice Murphy's advice and got new friends. I'm now in a group with some coworkers and it has been so much more fun.

a dreck

My DM husband has a similar problem with French. He doesn't speak a particularly silly dialect (although, I would argue, as a linguist, that any dialect can sound menacing or cute depending on context), but he says he has trouble creating 'atmospheres' in French compared to when he DMs in English (French is his first and only native language). He complains that he consumed too much TTRPG in English, so he has trouble coming up with words on the spot in French (he puts this down to a scarcity of good French language TTRPG podcasts, so if anyone has any recs, let me know!). Having heard him trying to produce the same descriptions in both languages, I noticed that he just doesn't use as many metaphors in French as in English - which also makes sense, because he pretty much only reads novels in English. He says his best trick is to prepare cinematic moments/descriptions in advance (he writes down a few lines that he really works on hard, so the words and phrases are super punchy). But I also read him your comment and when I said "What about for evil monologues?" he laughed and said "Oh, well, you're fucked mate." 🤷🏽

Chik3n

To the Honorable-Sprightly-Judges and Flirtatious-Gyatt-Damn-Hurwitz, This case is of a D&D murder mystery gone wrong. A player had to make death saving throws because he made poor decisions- However, our VERY interesting DM friend has a personal house rule: DM rolls death saving throws for all the players, all behind the screen. Players DO NOT know their death saves/fails rolled by the DM. Judges, this is a violation of player rights: to take death into their own hands to the very end! And so I humbly and patiently prostrate myself and my chaotic evil DM friend to the court.

Ken

Hi all! I bring you to you the case of the railroaded cannibal. I joined an online dark A Game of Thrones style game with a group of strangers. I played a former crusader with ptsd named Sir Casimir. I established he had done terrible things in the war that got him cursed by an enemy wizard, but I left it vague. After a few weeks the GM ran a one on one flashback of Casimir's time in the crusades for me. Long story short, it ended up me being captured and the GM narrating at me that I was cursed, which turned me into a cannibal and the GM narrated how I started eating people including children. Justices, I am not squeamish, or even object to the idea of playing a cannibal. I just would have you know, liked the chance to CHOOSE to be a cannibal. I rolled with it as best I could going forward, but it really shadowed my enjoyment of playing Cas. There were similar instances of the GM railroading people into doing things without them choosing to do so the year I played with this group, but that was the worst. In the end, I left because the GM insulted me for not following his extremist hateful politics. I am glad I got out of that game, and I know it was a bad group, especially the GM. But sometimes I still miss Casimir, and when I think of him, I wish I didn't think of him as a cannibal. Anyways. Can you punish my former GM?

Rebecca

To the bone dry justices and the slightly soggy bailiff, I bring to you the case of the OP spider. I’ll cut straight to the point. It was our final session. I was playing an Elven Warlock named Alanis, as it is a dope ass name and whoever came up with it is quite cool. We were trying to finish up the quest we were given and had ended up in a field equidistant from a wizard tower (our end goal) and a random city. So we determine to go to the tower. This was apparently contrary to what the dm had planed. The DM moaned a bit about us not going to his cool city, then got a funny look in his eye and narrated my character’s shoe getting stuck in the mud. So I narrate taking my foot out, pulling out the shoe, and then putting my foot back in. SURPRISE! In the shoe was a spider that then bit me and poisoned me without a save. That poison PARALYZED ME INSTANTLY and the DM was adamant that I would be unable to move for the next three days. And that’s how the campaign ended. A full year of play finished with my character paralyzed in the mud with no story arcs completed. So I ask you this, was the DM right to “railroad” us in such a way? All in all it doesn’t really matter, this is just a thing that will come to mind every once in a while and I’ll get pissed off all over again. I await your response. PS: I have many examples of this dm being……interesting in his rulings but that is a case for another day

Charlotte Glance

To the sweeties and cuties and Jake This is the case of the wrongly exploded dynamite. The party's barbarian fairy has recently acquired some cursed gloves that turned the end of our battle into pvp. In an effort to knock down the barbarian, my emo angsty boy light cleric (who worships the god of dads) cast fireball. This knocked the barbarian down, ended the effects of the curse, and I quickly stabilised the barbarian with spare the dying so we could figure out what to do. This was fine until the barbarian out of character said 'what about the dynamite?' wr had just left a town where we had acquired dynamite for our next task (blowing up a cursed altar) and the barbarian was holding 3 sticks when i hit them with fireball. I panicked but then looked at the spell card and was relieved to tell everyone that fireball doesn't ignite things rhat are being worn or carried. As the dynamite was being carried surely it wouldn't explode. My dm and my party overruled me. The dm said that the number one rule is the dm gets to set the rules and that he changes things all the time to make our lives easier. We ended the session on this cliff hanger and our barbarian has prepped a new character for next session just in case. No one is irl mad but I want vindication that I'm right. Please justices, intervene and save not only our barbarian but also my cleric who might be ruled to be in the blast radius when they go to cast spare the dying

Tom

To the magnanimous justices and mischievous bailiff. Not so much a case as I had actual jury duty this week. People are wild, and I’m not even talking about the defendant. A brief demographic survey (Name, age, occupation, marital status) quickly became a full blown dating profile for several people. “Hi I’m Joe, I like long hikes with my dog and am currently single.” Then, while we’re going through everyone’s dating applications, a defendant in the courtroom next to ours escaped custody as he was convicted (https://www.kare11.com/article/news/local/man-escapes-hennepin-county-courtroom-after-receiving-prison-sentence/89-17afcec4-04a7-4d03-b549-b3887f01c647). Like I said, shit was wild. Curious if you guys have ever served on the lower courts or reserve your opinions for the Supreme Crit? Objectively yours, Tom

ThatDammChickenNugget

To the supreme crit justices and I guess the baliff is also there. I’ve been playing in a homebrew Pathfinder 2e campaign for about a year and a half with some friends who managed to switch my love for D&D 5e to PF2e. As soon as I saw the Witch class, I knew that was the character I wanted to play. I made a Tiefling Witch who worships Aranyani and the Wilding Steward as her patron. Instead of horns, she has antlers, and her familiar—Nettle—is a red fox who is also part bioluminescent mushroom. She’s into herbology and mushrooms, seeks revenge on a family member, and found a new home in a druidic village after hitting rock bottom, where the Steward gifted her Nettle. Pretty early on, our party detoured to this village. There, we learned a lot about the campaign’s BBEG, and during downtime, my witch communed with the Steward, who cryptically tasked her with helping heal a sickened land. Now, over a year later, we are deep in those sickened lands. We recently discovered a nearby “World Tree”, guarded by mycoloids, but suffering from the blight. We fought to protect the tree and gradually uncovered clues about how my character was meant to combat the blight. During the final fight, it was revealed that the Steward had planned for my witch to sacrifice Nettle by merging her into the World Tree to purify the blight. It was emotional—I was having trouble roleplaying through my crying. Nettle was sacrificed. The tree transformed, and my character experienced Nettle’s final emotions before their connection was severed. The party gave my witch a moment alone, where she prayed and left her holy symbol behind with her familiar. Then, in a vision, the Steward told her he was stepping back—bigger things need his attention. Nettle would now take over as patron of the World Tree... and, it seemed, become my new patron too. After some more emotional party roleplay, the session ended. Then my GM abruptly told me that my “homework” before next session was to rework my character as a Cleric, and that I won’t be able to cast spells for the next few sessions as I am not a Witch anymore. Then he just left voice chat. The rest of the group immediately started praising the plot twist, shocked that I’d managed to keep the “class change” secret. That’s when I had to tell them that I didn’t. None of it was planned with me. I never wanted to stop being a witch. Now one friend agrees it was messed up to spring such a huge mechanical and narrative change on me without talking with me first. The others say it was great storytelling and I should just roll with it. And while I do think it was a cool scene, I can’t shake how gutted I feel. I loved playing a witch from the start and I loved Nettle. Now I’m staring at cleric feats, on the verge of tears, wondering if I’m just being dramatic. So I’m wondering, am I allowed to be a little stinker and be upset about this change?

GhostToken

Being infernal and being a druid are nowhere near the same thing 💀 As a DM who hasn't read a single page of the dm guide myself, I don't think your DM even knows what DnD is.

ToddFortnite

To the esteemed judges, and court bird Jake Turkwitz. I recently started DMing a campaign for my roomates and few friends of mine, which has been going really well. Most of the players are generally new (a few had played with me in a campaign previously), so I’ve been trying hard to encourage role play, especially in their backstories. Two of the players, our Ratfolk Rogue named Scruff Danger, and Dwarven Bard named Roxie Ironstring established in their backstories that they are ex’s. It’s been amazing for role play (and to watch my roomates flirt with each other), giving players something to talk about, tension during battle etc. Recently, Scruff came to me to bring up the idea that he and Roxie had hooked up before the campaign, and that Roxie was pregnant. I was surprised, but figured if they had both agreed on it, I’d find a way to make it work. In the finale of our “season” (we’re taking a break because people are going home for the summer as we’re still in college), I subtly hinted at the idea that Roxie was pregnant, and the table LOVED IT!!! It was a funny moment, and we talked about it after the session for a while after. I thought all was good. However, Roxie recently came to me and told me that they had NO idea Roxie was pregnant. There has been a discussion, and its been revealed that there was a BIG (likely drunken) miscommunication on what the two meant by “hook up”, and we have decided to retcon the reveal and move on, laughing it off. Judges, is Scruff in the wrong for wanting to be a daddy?

CrowsNestCraft

Hey there, I come asking.. forgiveness? I am typically a DM and the last DnD campaign I ran was a group of children(including my 9yo daughter) at my local library I was volunteering at. One of the sessions I rolled soooo many nat 20s and the encounter was already a bit too strong for them so I fudged rolls and nerfed the encounter. Fast forward, I have been mainly running Monster of the Week that uses D6’s for over a year, so that D20 hadn’t been used for a year. I pulled it out of my drawer to use as a player in a Frost Maiden campaign I’m in. I rolled 5 nat ones in that session, but ended with a clutch nat 20 as a final roll. I was under the impression that fudging rolls on children is the one exception in dice Christ’s eyes, so why was I punished and did I deserve it? P.S: I have been in the Frost Maiden campaign for 3 sessions before that, but I used my NADDPOD Pawpaw dice. They treated me well, it’s just the dice I used to fudge rolls on the kids.

Ross Begg

Desperately hoping this one got picked 😂

April Johnsen

I have for you a Dice Christ confessional! Despite my constant consumption of D&D shows, I’m still “new” to D&D since I never played as a kid and only recently bought the DMs guide. Admittedly, I believed I could wing it since I played with people I trusted that would help me out. Recently, my husband and I talked my sister into playing little one shots that we could string together where we switched off DMing. We all played as siblings. (A side note my sister’s first roll ever was a nat 20, that lucky bitch.) Anyway, it was my turn to DM and I had taken a One Shot Wonder and fluffed it up a bit, but when we got to the boss fight I misread the attacks. The book tells you the average damage but I thought that meant minimum damage, so I added that number to my rolls. I realized I was about to kill them and even fudging rolls AND knocking down the BBEGs HP, I knocked both my husband and sister out. Ultimately, I had the BBEG turn them into fish and they had to escape to then continue the fight after a rest, that the BBEG did not get. They won the fight and we wrapped the session. Later my husband was saying that fight seemed hard and I showed him the book, he pointed out my mistake. So esteemed folk of the cloth, can I be forgiven for my multiple sins?

Matthew J

To the honorable jakestices and bailiff whatshisname, I humbly bring before you the Case of the Dhampir Mutineer. A few years ago, our party was on a mission to cross the high seas and save our party’s Sorcerer after she was abducted. While she waited for her original PC to be rescued, the Sorcerer played “Maria,” an Artificer who was secretly half-vampire. One fateful session, my Paladin, who had been elected captain by the rest of the party, was keeping watch at the helm. When I asked the party’s Bard, “Trevor,” to take the wheel, Maria announced that she wanted to grab the wheel instead, prompting a contested Athletics check that Trevor won easily. Maria reacted by biting him with her secret vampire fangs. I tried to avoid full PVP by grappling Maria and asking for an explanation, but instead of answering any questions, she made her robot companion shoot me in the back. The party then collectively turned on her, and Trevor, convinced that she was a full vampire, finished her off while she was rolling death saves. After tying her up, we brought Maria back to life with a Revivify spell so we could get answers (and, out of game, to give the player a second chance with the character). For the next hour, we begged her to give any explanation about the vampirism or why we should trust her going forward, while she refused to explain herself, apologize, or acknowledge any wrongdoing. When our characters stepped off to the side to discuss how to proceed, she tried to break free of her bonds and escape. We knocked her back to 0 HP, and, seeing no other course of action that made sense in character, we ultimately decided to kill her. For additional context, this was not the only time that this player initiated PVP, but it was the only time that it resulted in a character death. Justices, were we wrong to kill our friend’s character twice, or were we justified in executing an unapologetic instigator? We humbly await your judgment.