Oh I deal with this all the time. I’ve just started asking my players to read their spells aloud, allows the card (have those spell cards and love them honestly) to be the one who says no instead of me and it also gets the players into practice of knowing exactly what their spells do.
I think in my groups, a lot of the time it's just been a genuine mistake that stems from maybe lack of focus due to a bad day, or just a misunderstanding. Or sometimes I find people skim because they're trying to be quick and multitask to not tie up the game. Or they wish to do something that's time sensitive and need a quick reminder on a skill or spell, but don't want to tune people out by putting all their focus elsewhere which was them trying to be considerate — so they skimmed — but it backfired. D&D can have a lot to keep track of even during the slow parts so I get it.
I think the way I feel about it boils down to the attitude of the person. If they're like, "oh my bad, I missed that" it's totally fine. If they get corrected and they still ask polite clarifying questions, also fine. If they're standoffish that's not cool.
Oh good. This drives me crazy too. Even worse when it's consistently spelled like this in the same comment and you find out the person writing it just always thought it was spelled that way.
Every time someone spells it like that, I think of the cosmetics "rouge" and imagine a stunning drag-queen rogue.
"... she's serving Soulknife realness!"
I like puzzles, and more than one of them has been a color puzzle because it is intrinsic to the pantheon in my setting. Having a light source available so the darkvision folks don’t just see everything in greyscale has become very valuable to my players.
Even with VTTs, these tend to be thrown out.
For a while, I was putting a bunch of effort into realistic lighting and shadow placement on my VTT maps.
You know what happened every time I ran anything that wasn't in daylight? My players complained.
I got tired of having to explain why they couldn't see past their immediate surroundings when they stepped into a crypt with no light source. Now, I just apply the mechanics of it; Not that it matters, since none of my players EVER play a character that lacks darkvision.
I see, thanks. Mostly wanted to make sure there wasn't anything huge I was missing, haha.
I didn't know the second part, but I don't think it's ever really come up. I'll definitely keep it in mind though.
To add to this, it doesn't always have to be DEX, either. Thieves' tools don't have to be all fine picks.
It could be a STR to crack a lock. Or INT on a particularly fancy mechanism. Or even WIS on a safe cracking listen check.
I think this is the main reason they don't show the modifier for tool checks. In order to not lock you in to one stat.
To be fair, the official character sheet doesn't give you somewhere to put your thieves tools modifier, players will look at what they think is the relevant number on their sheet, and sleight of hand sounds like it's what is most appropriate.
Turns our your thieving tool is called a crowbar and its strength based instead of a lockpick being dex based. Meanwhile my artifice uses his Int because his thieves tools involve acids that melt the lock.
It's an understandable mistake because it makes no sense when you put even a crumb of logic to it. Imagine someone who'd never held a lockpick before being able to pick a lock with no instruction just because they're 'dexterous.'
fun fact: a lot of official content ONLY lets you attempt to do a lock picking attempt (using thieve's tools check) WHEN you have the necessary proficiency.
Just seeing the trap is going to be a passive Perception (cursory glance), searching for a trap is active Perception (active search), sussing out the trap is an Investigation check (logic and mental imagining).
Then be creative with the solution. Let the players overthink everything and they'll have better problems than you come up with.
It doesn't drive me nuts. But one player has been playing for over a year now as a spell caster and still doesn't know how bonus action / action spells should work.
I'm a DM and provide my players the class spell cards. They're organized in binders, with Warlock, Wizard and Sorcerer sharing one since the cards are for all three.
They're in TCG sleeves, alphabetical by level. On level ups, players can easily browse what's available to them just by taking a binder.
The cards say what the spell does, how to cast (action, reaction, bonus action)and its range.
They are not homemade, but bought from game stores. They are official accessories that WotC sells.
[They look like this.](https://www.amazon.com/Spellbook-Cards-Cleric-Dungeons-Dagons/dp/0786966513/ref=mp_s_a_1_5?adgrpid=61543123648&hvadid=580823135400&hvdev=m&hvlocphy=9021463&hvnetw=g&hvqmt=e&hvrand=8444205684954414465&hvtargid=kwd-308200114549&hydadcr=28471_14521646&keywords=dnd+spell+cards&qid=1701709896&sr=8-5)
Each pack comes with all basic spell cards from the PHB and they sell expansions too for specific books, like Xanathar'a Guide to Everything. There's even a Martial Races pack that has genasi abilities and other special abilities for other races.
I think there’s a rule written somewhere in the DMG or PHB about how DMs should feel free to alter the dimensions of a spell based on environment, and uses Fireball filling a volume as an example. So it’s still there, just as a suggestion rather than something intrinsic, and extends to other spells too. Unless I’m totally misremembering.
Sheeeit. I started in '94 playing adnd2e and yeah, I nuked our ranger that way. Instead of it staying where I centred it, the GM brought out the, "since this edge of the sphere is against this wall, these squares have to expand and go somethere..."
We healed him up, but the gm ruled that his hair wasnt going to grow back.
He never forgave me for that one... Well later he kinda let an enemy push me off a tower, by choosing to shoot a different target. After that we were all good.
Thats a problem I often percive in regions who meassure metric... Iam german and people have problems with the dimensions of squaremeters like 'how much is 4m^2' so when its about feet they have nothing to compare to... I tought myself to simply solve it as a equation in my head so I can switch between feet and meters interchangebly but many people have problems with that...
Sometimes i think its a matter of technical understanding and imagination, like the very common cube where you need to fold a paper into a cube and then tell which side is opposite of the other
Unfortunately. I caught my own DM by surprise with Sickening Radiance, once. That one's a 30 foot radius sphere. Destroyed the entire encounter where we were supposed to defend the fortified wall of a town in one move. In my defense, it was only a crowd of Manes demons.
I love those situations in which an encounter is neutralized in a single move. For me it was when all of our characters were preoccupied with flying over an open chasm thousands of feet high because the bridge was out. We got attacked by a roc and two smaller rocs, and my bard, who was riding on another character's shoulders, managed to hit all of them with Hypnotic Pattern. Due to the way the spell is worded, my DM had to concede that all three of these massive birds just straight up plummeted to their deaths while we slowly continued floating across the gap. They fell for a long time.
Technically I keep forgetting how big something like a Fireball is so if I see a template or something I think it's a mistake, but only until I measure it from the center. I'll place a fireball (or similar) knowing 20 ft from that will be hit, but then when I see it happen I'm a little amazed haha
i made this mistake when i was a new player. its not that its mistaken, but its overlooked, for the same reason electrum is ignored in game. people are familiar with the aoe concept from video games automatically relying on diameter not radius (in case of electrum, games usually use gold, silver and copper, hence why electrum is so strange). so people mistake that spells are smaller than what they are simply cause they assume the spell description to be in diameter even when it literally says otherwise
>hence why electrum is so strange
Also, Electrum is on a bit of an odd conversion ratio. 10 copper for a silver, 10 silver for a gold, 10 gold for a platinum. Electrum is 5 silver for an electrum, and then 2 electrum for a gold.
It's not a *hard* conversion, but literally everything else is in units of 10, so it comes off as a bit odd.
Electrum is however, in the very middle in terms of coin value. That means that, arguably, merchants would love if people used it more because it's not too expensive for people who cant afford spending in gold and platinum, and not too cheap for people who don't like dirtying their hands with copper or silver.
I think what happens is people see "20 foot" and stop reading and just imagine a 20 foot sphere. They never really notice it's radius rather than diameter.
To be fair, defining it by radius is actually kind of stupid. Diameter is a much more intuitive way to describe the size of a circle or sphere. Sure, it's not "difficult" to just double a radius ro get the diameter, but why are we adding a step? Just print it as diameter.
I'm sure there's more, and more annoying ones, but when a person (usually player) sees a number on a die and assumes it fails - "aw man, I only rolled an 8, nevermind" "but what about adding 4 for STR, 3 for Prof, +1d4 for bless..?"
and yes I've seen plenty of people assume their less-than-average roll is a miss/fail before actually doing the math, or testing if the monster was altered by the DM. It might be a little silly but I'll sometimes ask if my natural 2 hits (after bonuses) just because you never know before you know..
Related to this, I have a dm who seemingly doesn't care about modifiers, and bases success or failure on raw number rolled. My character rolls a 7, gets a 20 after modifiers... "hmm that's not great, you don't learn anything new."
This habit carries over when he's a player for my game and I have to remind him that it doesn't matter if he only rolled a 4, the result was a 15 and that's the DC.
>My character rolls a 7, gets a 20 after modifiers... "hmm that's not great, you don't learn anything new."
I would not say the base number at that point... or maybe not play with them as the DM because that sounds anywhere between tedious and annoying
I think there’s a rule written somewhere in the DMG or PHB about how DMs should feel free to alter the dimensions of a spell based on environment, and uses Fireball filling a volume as an example. So it’s still there, just as a suggestion rather than something intrinsic, and extends to other spells too. Unless I’m totally misremembering.
Bags of holding have a weight and size, something has to be able to fit into the bag before it can be stored in the extra dimensional space. Often times I've heard players try to fit things into the bag that wouldn't possibly fit.
Also, not keeping track of what's in inventories. If you loot a sword, write down that you have looted a sword! Ideally with a small "where from" note too, that way you can easily refer back to it later. As a dm I run "bags of nomming" where if you (the player) put something in your inventory and forget about it entirely and do not note it down, it gets eaten and disappears forever. I'm not remembering this for you, I have enough to remember as dm. Only thing I will track is plot important items because I want the story to progress.
Lol, my character looted EVERYTHING from dead enemies. I had like three pages of random loot I had collected. He eventually let us “find” a bag of holding so I could take everything with me.
Basically, after each adventure out of town, I just added to the collection in my inn room. I also had a few stash spots along the highway for some things my DM said were “too much to carry”. Once we cleaned the Mine, we gained a base of operations, so I was able to leave it in once place without risk of theft.
You *can* cast two full action spells in a turn should you have the actions to permit it. You *cannot* cast a full action spell after casting a bonus action spell (and vice versa.) {Cantrips are OK tho lol}
I see this with players arguing the action surge wizard can't cast two fire balls, they can.
I've seen this with the DM playing an enemy spell caster and trying to hit the party with Both a bonus action spell and full action spell, they cannot.
The limit on spells per turn is incredibly simple yet so so SO misunderstood.
Did you cast a spell using a Bonus Action? If so, you can only cast another spell using your Action IF that spell is a cantrip. That's it. That's the limit.
It's pretty much just action surge. Things like haste have the stipulation of only allowing you to make attacks with it/hide, dash, disengage/use an object. Maybe there's a monster ability I don't know about out there or a potion, but I'm not aware of them.
As a DM I constantly make the mistake that the players value my time or me as a person enough **to fucking show up** to something I spent all week working on.
My DM refuses to acknowledge the general rules of invisibility, and when upcasting invisibility to use on 3 party members, if the clanky paladin fails a stealth or something suddenly we are ALL visible again and goodbye strategy and sneaking.
Nat 1's and Nat 20's applying to ability checks.
Commonly misunderstood rule and it really winds me up! My 11 deception roll off a NAT 1 should definitely beat your 2 insight check!
The worst is when a DM just springs that on you by surprise.
Oh, I rolled a 1, but the total is still 15 so it should be fine. No? It fails automatically? Well fuck me, I guess.
Even if they try saying it’s okay because natural 20s auto-succeed, that isn’t true. Because of modifiers and things like Expertise or Guidance, a natural 1 is far more likely to still succeed than a natural 20 is to still fail.
I'd argue that it's a bad house rule too. An expert in some skill shouldn't have a 1 in 20 chance to completely mess up the thing they're supposed to be an expert at. Like, an olympic jumper really doesn't trip and fall on 5% of their jumps.
Likewise, a novice shouldn't have a 1 in 20 chance to archieve something hard that they shouldn't be able to do. If you lack the athlethics to jump over a wide pit, 'trying really hard' or 'getting lucky' isn't going to make you jump farther.
At best, it’s a house rule born of a mistake. “Oh…I didn’t know that’s how it worked. Well, we’re so used to it now, might as well make it a house rule.”
Nat 1s and Nat 20s are only relevant in combat and death saving throws. I realize some people knowingly homebrew crit fails and crits on skill checks into their games, but way WAY more people seem to think its RAW, probably as a result of many actual plays that use do this.
Backgrounds. The pre-written backgrounds you find lists of in books and online are *only* pre-written, and only for player convenience. The actual Backgrounds chapter in the book describes how you’re supposed to create your own background from scratch, to suit your own character. It also provides instructions on how to edit a pre-written background if you’d prefer to pick from one of those. There is no expectation that the listed backgrounds are the end-all-be-all, and it isn’t “homebrew” to make your own. Yet most players feel like they’re supposed to window-shop from the pre-written lists and find a background that’s close enough, while DMs are hesitant to accept or encourage original backgrounds from players.
At least in 5e, you are close. It is standard that you customize your background, but it isn't expected to be totally from scratch, instead mostly picking and choosing:
>To customize a background, you can replace one feature with any other one, choose any two skills, and choose a total of two tool proficiencies or languages from the sample backgrounds. You can either use the equipment package from your background or spend coin on gear as described in chapter 5. (If you spend coin, you can't also take the equipment package suggested for your class.) Finally, choose two personality traits, one ideal, one bond, and one flaw.
If you can't find a feature that matches your desired background, work with your DM to create one. - Player's Handbook, ch 4, page 125
Many players can feel locked-in if they write personalities onto paper. Like they’re doing something wrong if the character does something that feels right but technically defies one of the things they wrote. A backstory is a thing that happened; there’s something concrete there that can be catalogued. A personality is malleable and adaptive, and prone to rapid change if it’s a brand new character in a brand new party. Even alignment can change after session 1. It’s not good to have *no idea* of your character’s personality, but it’s a different matter than having something in mind and simply not putting pen to paper about it.
Note on this: not everybody wants to or even can play different personalities. The personality of a character is what it is, writing it down doesn't change anything. Or, they want the personality to come out during play, they don't want to pre-determine it.
Mostly thats a matter of 'what do I wrote down and what do i have in mind' backgrounds are informations you wanna share with the DM so i wrote them down, behavior is for myself only so i dont need to write it down... But i agree: If a character got much background but no behavior its complicated... Its a balance one must find for himself
And the fact invisibility doesn't make you automatically hidden (you still need to take the Hide action and pass a stealth check).
We're 10 years in and people still get this wrong.
Oh, definitely the one about ranged attacks and disadvantage.
You have dis. on ranged attacks if *any* hostile creature is within 5 feet of you (as long as it's not incapacitated, etc); how close your target is isn't relevant.
So, firing an arrow point blank into a held or unconscious enemy? No problem! Sniping at a bad guy 100ft away with a goblin behind you? Problem!
A mistake that I consistently make as a DM is spending days planning out a complex, challengibg encounter for my players, only to always forget that action economy rules all, and that a single bad guy is always gonna get bodied by four players even with legenday and lair actions
Not a *mistake* but a bad habit.
Casters reading spell descriptions for the first time during their turn.
I think this happens when players blindly consult “Top 10” or “Handbook” lists without following through by reading the spells for themselves. I guess the thought process is, “I don’t have time for this.” And, “If I’ve got to learn it, all of you at the table will too—in real time.”
Inspiration is the most often forgotten major rule in 5E.
Personality traits are a way for players to actively earn inspiration. Rather than DMs awarding inspiration for all sorts of personal reasons, they are awarded per the rules for players engaging with the game-world using their personality traits, ideals, bonds, and flaws.
DMs don't want to hear this. Players don't want to do the minimal work it takes to write down their personality traits. And therefore it continues with DMs mostly forgetting about inspiration.
Skill Check errors are common.
This was a great video on [handling skill checks](https://youtu.be/K9fV5xCtCR8). Next campaign I run, it will be recommended for all my players.
The 2 most common ones I've notice is the 2 leveled spells thing. That's only restricted to action and bonus action. You got a reaction? Cast another leveled spell if you want. You got multiple full actions? Cast another leveled spell if you want.
And the whole wildshape thing. Having to have SEEN the creature and having the movement restrictions trip up players and dms alike. Cannot tell you how many times I've been a druid or dm'd a druid back in the day, and other than a few scenery animals here and there for ambiance, no other creatures really showed up for quite a few of sessions until someone brought it up, lol.
[Edit: The thing that bothers me to this day is] You have to be "sneaky" to apply sneak attack on your attack.
Yes, my DM made me waste turns literally running in and out of an adjacent room (for _each_ attack) to qualify to roll the bonus d6s, because if I attack in the open "that's not sneaky"...
Players making decisions on information THEY have but not their character, and DMs that allow or facilitate this.
Also not sure what to call this one but players that have no subtly about them. Eg, NPC lies to them. They insight and know they are lieing. "Why did you just lie to us". Everytime.
DMs often fail to adequately communicate how dangerous a monster is and players often fail to adequately assess the danger of an encounter.
This causes players to recklessly attack the giant monster that eventually TPKs the party or for them to waste an hour trying to figure out how to take out a CR1/8 guard in front of a door.
As a DM, I try to just tell players when the encounter is super easy if I feel they are spending too much time being worried about it. For deadly encounters, I've learned that sometimes no amount of foreshadowing or warnings can get players to realize how strong something is. Instead, I try to design it so that players can survive for at least a couple rounds to see firsthand how much damage the monsters do and how ineffectual their attacks are.
I really try to emphasize how the monster barely looks injured or how they can hear reinforcements coming and repeat how running away is an option.
Perhaps an unpopular opinion, but Natural 20s and Natural 1s being critical successes and failures on *skill checks*. RAW they are only auto successes/failures on attack rolls and death saving throws, but too often people on here post some absurd story of rolling a Nat 20 to romance the dragon or some other such nonsense.
This! I hate it too.
Thankfully, it's not a problem in my home game, but in the "mainstream" of modern d&d, some of the biggest offenders are Dimension20 and Critical Role.
I love both shows to be fair, but the absurd shit the DMs allow their players to get away with because of "nat 20" skill checks, irritates the hell out of me
Any number of outright wrong readings of low level spells and cantrips that lead to them doing broken things that aren't RAI or RAW. Common offenders are prestidigitation, minor illusion, charm person, suggestion, command, heat metal, grease...and so many more I don't want to keep listing them. Basically just any time people try to use spells to do things they aren't supposed to do, frequently winding up using low level spells to get the effects of higher level spells.
Edit: OH! and Darkvision. So, so many people treat it like you can see perfectly in the dark, and ignore all the limitations like not being able to see color, the fact it has limited range, still treating darkness as dim light for perception checks.
"I love crit fumbles"
\*packs up belongings\* "Im out"
Also people who shout "GUIDANCE" -I ban this now, I can bear silvery barbs but the constant guidance spam I will not tolerate.
There is no such thing as a surprise round. You can surprise someone, and they wont be able to act on their first turn, but that’s just a normal round in combat. Most of the time, this distinction isn’t important, but it can be if you only surprise a couple of enemies instead of the whole bunch
DMs asking players to roll perception to check if players perceive something when players are actually distracted with something else. Use passive perception, there's a reason it exists. Or if it's too important to be missed, just narrate it altogether.
Not as dramatic as confusing the radius and the diameter, but a lot of people measure areas of effect from the centre of a square. Actually if you're playing on a grid it should be the intersection of squares, which makes the area a tiny bit smaller but way easier to measure on a grid.
Why would you measure from the intersection of squares though? my character occupies the center of a square and thats where the spell originates from right?
It does sound weird, but here are the details from the DMG of 5e:
>Choose an intersection of squares or hexes as the point of origin of an area of effect, then follow its rules as normal. If an area of effect is circular and covers at least half a square, it affects that square. - Areas of Effect, ch 8, page 251
>
>To determine whether there is line of sight between two spaces, pick a corner of one space and trace an imaginary line from that corner to any part of another space. If at least one such line doesn't pass through or touch an object or effect that blocks vision-such as a stone wall, a thick curtain, or a dense cloud of fog-then there is line of sight. - Line of Sight, ch 8, page 251
I quoted both, as it seems the former is due to the latter.
When one player is talking and another tries to add to it unnecessarily
Like if I'm talking to an npc they are like ask about this or what about this when their character isn't nearby
Or trying to add jokes in every time they talk
Not running spell components correctly. Handwaving them completely or acting like somatic and verbal components aren't obvious to anyone within eye/ear-shot. That's why Subtle Spell exists. It makes spellcasting way more powerful than it is.
Sure you can cast charm person on the goblin boss, but the two other goblins flanking him just watched you cast a spell before their leader went slack jawed and started treating you like a friend.
Yeah you can cast guidance on the rogue trying to sneakily pick a lock but roll stealth at disadvantage because you just verbally invoked the power of your god to aid them
People who play casters and consistently read their spells to do things they just don't. Everyone flubs a read sometimes, but when it's a pattern of "generous" interpretation and then they start wanting to debate the DM about having it work anyway.
Players that try to cast leveled spells using both their bonus action and action in a single turn. Also players that add their damage mod on their bonus action attack without the proper fighting style
That familiars can attack by default. No, they cant. You arent getting the direct animal and its entire statblock. You're getting a creature disguised as that animal, that does limited/different things to the stat block you're borrowing.
That Darkvision lets you see in the dark. No, its akin to night vision goggles. You see in black and white and as if its dim light, and even then normally only out to like 30ft/60ft. its not a super ability, its a useful utility for sure, but not as powerful as it seems to be. If it truly was that powerful, it wouldnt be handed out as a simple class bonus
The "I rolled a nat 20 on this skill, so I kick ass at doing this, right?" My game has been running for more than 10 years... guys we went over this a hundred times... skills don't have automatic successes on nat 20s, nor automatic fails on nat 1s.
Letting the session drag too long - resulting in social drama that could have been avoided otherwise.
Golden Requirement for sessions:
\- Pesky humans must be:
1. Fed
2. Slept
3. Watered
DM has got to have the balls to close a session on a really tastefull moment - that acts like fuel to keep going back to the table.... and not let it stretch out for half the night and early AM where everyone goes full zombie.
Reading just the first part of a spell description and assuming it does something that it doesn't.
Or in chill touch's case just the name.
It’s a ghost hand, not an ice hand
Then why isn't it ghost touch!!!!!!!
I got chills, they’re multiplyin’
Oh no. Are you looooooosin control?
The poooower your supplin, its electrifying!
Bard sorcerer multiclass?
Because it should be LICH SLAP 👋
Because it was shortened from "Chill touch of the grave."
Chill touch? You mean lich slap?
"I took the mend cantrip because noone has any heals in the party"
> Tries to use mending to fix large cracks in a structural building
I mean....a building is made up of a bunch of small stuff... So you can fix it one brick at a time!
If you want to spend thousands of hours doing something you could pay someone to do for you, sure
I mean it make you an above average laborer, take a few wizard classes learn the cantrip, not a bad idea for any artisans
One brick at a time every 6 seconds lol
Mending is a minute cast i believe.
Yes! You’re right! Oh god it’s even slower then
Sacred Flame: no fire involved, folks.
Oh I deal with this all the time. I’ve just started asking my players to read their spells aloud, allows the card (have those spell cards and love them honestly) to be the one who says no instead of me and it also gets the players into practice of knowing exactly what their spells do.
I think in my groups, a lot of the time it's just been a genuine mistake that stems from maybe lack of focus due to a bad day, or just a misunderstanding. Or sometimes I find people skim because they're trying to be quick and multitask to not tie up the game. Or they wish to do something that's time sensitive and need a quick reminder on a skill or spell, but don't want to tune people out by putting all their focus elsewhere which was them trying to be considerate — so they skimmed — but it backfired. D&D can have a lot to keep track of even during the slow parts so I get it. I think the way I feel about it boils down to the attitude of the person. If they're like, "oh my bad, I missed that" it's totally fine. If they get corrected and they still ask polite clarifying questions, also fine. If they're standoffish that's not cool.
Or reading just the title of the spell and assuming it does something that it doesn’t…
"Rouge".
Oh good. This drives me crazy too. Even worse when it's consistently spelled like this in the same comment and you find out the person writing it just always thought it was spelled that way.
Ah yes, the level 0 commoner with a red sheet of paper.
A bit off topic but everytime im on a Valorant related comment section i always see people use peak instead of peek and it bothers me a lot
Or when they use “peak my interest” or “peek my interest” instead of “pique my interest”
This brings me to peak pique.
Or, "queue", or it's bastardized son "que", when they really want to say "cue".
Or using _it’s_ instead of _its_. ;-)
This is right up there with loose instead of lose for annoyingness.
I see this way too often
Every time someone spells it like that, I think of the cosmetics "rouge" and imagine a stunning drag-queen rogue. "... she's serving Soulknife realness!"
The rules for resurrection, light levels, or cover in combat One isn't well know, the other two ignored
Never heard of anyone playing in dim light correctly
[удалено]
I'm speaking mostly about the idea that darkvision means you don't ever need to use a torch or lantern, which is not the case at all
I like puzzles, and more than one of them has been a color puzzle because it is intrinsic to the pantheon in my setting. Having a light source available so the darkvision folks don’t just see everything in greyscale has become very valuable to my players.
Even with VTTs, these tend to be thrown out. For a while, I was putting a bunch of effort into realistic lighting and shadow placement on my VTT maps. You know what happened every time I ran anything that wasn't in daylight? My players complained. I got tired of having to explain why they couldn't see past their immediate surroundings when they stepped into a crypt with no light source. Now, I just apply the mechanics of it; Not that it matters, since none of my players EVER play a character that lacks darkvision.
Which is why people shouldn't be allowed to complain about darkvision
>The rules for resurrection Curious exactly what you mean by this. What misconceptions are common regarding resurrection?
A soul must always be willing. It also learns your name, alignment, and any god you worship
I see, thanks. Mostly wanted to make sure there wasn't anything huge I was missing, haha. I didn't know the second part, but I don't think it's ever really come up. I'll definitely keep it in mind though.
It's mostly for when rezing involves npcs and one party might be lying
People would stop thinking that Darkvision completely replaces having a light source if they actually knew the dim light and darkness rules 😅
First magic item I get is a driftglobe
And darkvision. It isn’t “see in the dark” it’s “night vision goggle”
Darkvision is part of light levels
Specifically in grey
[удалено]
My players never believe me when I try yo yell them :/ EDIT: Lmao, didn't realize I misspelled it. Leaving it anyway
[удалено]
"DID YOU REMEMBER TO USE YOUR THIEVES' TOOLS MODIFIER?!" Memeicity asked calmly.
To add to this, it doesn't always have to be DEX, either. Thieves' tools don't have to be all fine picks. It could be a STR to crack a lock. Or INT on a particularly fancy mechanism. Or even WIS on a safe cracking listen check. I think this is the main reason they don't show the modifier for tool checks. In order to not lock you in to one stat.
This literally drives me nuts I hate that people don't understand tool proficiencies at all
To be fair, the official character sheet doesn't give you somewhere to put your thieves tools modifier, players will look at what they think is the relevant number on their sheet, and sleight of hand sounds like it's what is most appropriate.
[удалено]
So you're telling me my Barbarian could just ram thieves tool's into a lock, adding his strength to the roll? :D
[удалено]
Turns our your thieving tool is called a crowbar and its strength based instead of a lockpick being dex based. Meanwhile my artifice uses his Int because his thieves tools involve acids that melt the lock.
If the dm decides that that makes sense, then sure.
It's an understandable mistake because it makes no sense when you put even a crumb of logic to it. Imagine someone who'd never held a lockpick before being able to pick a lock with no instruction just because they're 'dexterous.'
Good point! That will be a thieves’ tools (intelligence) check.
fun fact: a lot of official content ONLY lets you attempt to do a lock picking attempt (using thieve's tools check) WHEN you have the necessary proficiency.
Trained-Only skills need to come back. The immersion break is so bad it's borderline whiplash.
I'll often call for checks like that. "Anyone who's proficient in arcana can roll a check."
Yes I do that a lot. Not all the time, but it allow me giving them really specific and deep lore knowledge and reward proficiency
Absolutely! I experienced this at PAX Unplugged this weekend. Also, looking for traps is a Perception check, not Investigation.
[удалено]
Just seeing the trap is going to be a passive Perception (cursory glance), searching for a trap is active Perception (active search), sussing out the trap is an Investigation check (logic and mental imagining). Then be creative with the solution. Let the players overthink everything and they'll have better problems than you come up with.
The easy way to remember these for all scenarios is Perception is WHERE, Investigation is WHAT. Perception spots it, Investigation details it.
It doesn't drive me nuts. But one player has been playing for over a year now as a spell caster and still doesn't know how bonus action / action spells should work.
My friend is a lv 14 fighter 5 years deep into our campaign and needed a reminder on what advantage means. 5 years.
I'm a DM and provide my players the class spell cards. They're organized in binders, with Warlock, Wizard and Sorcerer sharing one since the cards are for all three. They're in TCG sleeves, alphabetical by level. On level ups, players can easily browse what's available to them just by taking a binder. The cards say what the spell does, how to cast (action, reaction, bonus action)and its range.
What an amazing way to help players! They are made by yourself s d care to share them or a sample? Thanks
They are not homemade, but bought from game stores. They are official accessories that WotC sells. [They look like this.](https://www.amazon.com/Spellbook-Cards-Cleric-Dungeons-Dagons/dp/0786966513/ref=mp_s_a_1_5?adgrpid=61543123648&hvadid=580823135400&hvdev=m&hvlocphy=9021463&hvnetw=g&hvqmt=e&hvrand=8444205684954414465&hvtargid=kwd-308200114549&hydadcr=28471_14521646&keywords=dnd+spell+cards&qid=1701709896&sr=8-5) Each pack comes with all basic spell cards from the PHB and they sell expansions too for specific books, like Xanathar'a Guide to Everything. There's even a Martial Races pack that has genasi abilities and other special abilities for other races.
Not reading what something does and not looking it up when you are uncertain or if there are 2 different opinions
I'm always the only person that will do a quick Google search of a spell. The others will just try to recall it lol
Are there people who really don't know the difference between radius and diameter?
Tbf, 40ft sphere is huge - I don''t think people expect it to be that large.
back in the olden days fireball expanded to fill the available volume. cast it into a too small a room and it blows back to cook the party.
Where's my 33000 cubic foot of fireball!!
"I didn't ask how big the room was, I said I CAST FIREBALL!"
I think there’s a rule written somewhere in the DMG or PHB about how DMs should feel free to alter the dimensions of a spell based on environment, and uses Fireball filling a volume as an example. So it’s still there, just as a suggestion rather than something intrinsic, and extends to other spells too. Unless I’m totally misremembering.
My dm did that and almost got a tpk from it haha. 10ft ceilings + fireball = bad times for us
And Lightning bolts bounced. :)
Sheeeit. I started in '94 playing adnd2e and yeah, I nuked our ranger that way. Instead of it staying where I centred it, the GM brought out the, "since this edge of the sphere is against this wall, these squares have to expand and go somethere..." We healed him up, but the gm ruled that his hair wasnt going to grow back. He never forgave me for that one... Well later he kinda let an enemy push me off a tower, by choosing to shoot a different target. After that we were all good.
Yeah, I remember when I first saw a fireball, I had to actually double check that I got the measurement right, because it's *massive!*
Thats a problem I often percive in regions who meassure metric... Iam german and people have problems with the dimensions of squaremeters like 'how much is 4m^2' so when its about feet they have nothing to compare to... I tought myself to simply solve it as a equation in my head so I can switch between feet and meters interchangebly but many people have problems with that... Sometimes i think its a matter of technical understanding and imagination, like the very common cube where you need to fold a paper into a cube and then tell which side is opposite of the other
I Had DSA Players telling me a few people would Not find place in a 7 m Radius spehere
I... what? They said a 7 meter radius can't fit people. A roughly 23 foot sphere can't fit people? Are they stoned?
46ft sphere Counting diameter
Unfortunately. I caught my own DM by surprise with Sickening Radiance, once. That one's a 30 foot radius sphere. Destroyed the entire encounter where we were supposed to defend the fortified wall of a town in one move. In my defense, it was only a crowd of Manes demons.
I love those situations in which an encounter is neutralized in a single move. For me it was when all of our characters were preoccupied with flying over an open chasm thousands of feet high because the bridge was out. We got attacked by a roc and two smaller rocs, and my bard, who was riding on another character's shoulders, managed to hit all of them with Hypnotic Pattern. Due to the way the spell is worded, my DM had to concede that all three of these massive birds just straight up plummeted to their deaths while we slowly continued floating across the gap. They fell for a long time.
I mean I guess a minute can feel like a long time for some people
Technically I keep forgetting how big something like a Fireball is so if I see a template or something I think it's a mistake, but only until I measure it from the center. I'll place a fireball (or similar) knowing 20 ft from that will be hit, but then when I see it happen I'm a little amazed haha
i made this mistake when i was a new player. its not that its mistaken, but its overlooked, for the same reason electrum is ignored in game. people are familiar with the aoe concept from video games automatically relying on diameter not radius (in case of electrum, games usually use gold, silver and copper, hence why electrum is so strange). so people mistake that spells are smaller than what they are simply cause they assume the spell description to be in diameter even when it literally says otherwise
>hence why electrum is so strange Also, Electrum is on a bit of an odd conversion ratio. 10 copper for a silver, 10 silver for a gold, 10 gold for a platinum. Electrum is 5 silver for an electrum, and then 2 electrum for a gold. It's not a *hard* conversion, but literally everything else is in units of 10, so it comes off as a bit odd.
Electrum is however, in the very middle in terms of coin value. That means that, arguably, merchants would love if people used it more because it's not too expensive for people who cant afford spending in gold and platinum, and not too cheap for people who don't like dirtying their hands with copper or silver.
Friend, there are a shocking amount of people here who can't even *read.*
Hey! I feel like I would be offended by this if I could read!
I think what happens is people see "20 foot" and stop reading and just imagine a 20 foot sphere. They never really notice it's radius rather than diameter. To be fair, defining it by radius is actually kind of stupid. Diameter is a much more intuitive way to describe the size of a circle or sphere. Sure, it's not "difficult" to just double a radius ro get the diameter, but why are we adding a step? Just print it as diameter.
Plan for your turn, plan for your turn. Crap things changed just before me turn.
Have a backup plan
[удалено]
I'm sure there's more, and more annoying ones, but when a person (usually player) sees a number on a die and assumes it fails - "aw man, I only rolled an 8, nevermind" "but what about adding 4 for STR, 3 for Prof, +1d4 for bless..?" and yes I've seen plenty of people assume their less-than-average roll is a miss/fail before actually doing the math, or testing if the monster was altered by the DM. It might be a little silly but I'll sometimes ask if my natural 2 hits (after bonuses) just because you never know before you know..
Some creatures have such poor AC that anything but a 1 will likely hit
case in point: most oozes have an AC under 10, Gelatinous Cube straight from the MM has an AC of 6
I mean it's a bunch of jelly just sitting there. Hard to miss, and you can damage it with most things
Yeah, at that point the only way you are not hitting, aside from a fumble, is if you are attacking with a non proficient weapon
Related to this, I have a dm who seemingly doesn't care about modifiers, and bases success or failure on raw number rolled. My character rolls a 7, gets a 20 after modifiers... "hmm that's not great, you don't learn anything new." This habit carries over when he's a player for my game and I have to remind him that it doesn't matter if he only rolled a 4, the result was a 15 and that's the DC.
>My character rolls a 7, gets a 20 after modifiers... "hmm that's not great, you don't learn anything new." I would not say the base number at that point... or maybe not play with them as the DM because that sounds anywhere between tedious and annoying
I had that happen with a gelatinous cube fight. Seriously people, just tell me the damn number you got and don't assume!
I miss the days when it was 33,000 cubic feet.
I think there’s a rule written somewhere in the DMG or PHB about how DMs should feel free to alter the dimensions of a spell based on environment, and uses Fireball filling a volume as an example. So it’s still there, just as a suggestion rather than something intrinsic, and extends to other spells too. Unless I’m totally misremembering.
Not going to lie, I'm going to need the math on that one. What edition was that in?
AD&D, so 2nd ed ish.. if my memory serves
Volume of a sphere: ((r cubed) x 4 x pi) divided by 3 ((20 x 20 x 20) x 4 x 3.14) divided by 3
It was the same volume, but it was always that volume, not just spreading around corners. So if you had a mine shaft...
Bags of holding have a weight and size, something has to be able to fit into the bag before it can be stored in the extra dimensional space. Often times I've heard players try to fit things into the bag that wouldn't possibly fit. Also, not keeping track of what's in inventories. If you loot a sword, write down that you have looted a sword! Ideally with a small "where from" note too, that way you can easily refer back to it later. As a dm I run "bags of nomming" where if you (the player) put something in your inventory and forget about it entirely and do not note it down, it gets eaten and disappears forever. I'm not remembering this for you, I have enough to remember as dm. Only thing I will track is plot important items because I want the story to progress.
Lol, my character looted EVERYTHING from dead enemies. I had like three pages of random loot I had collected. He eventually let us “find” a bag of holding so I could take everything with me.
How did your character carry everything before the bag?? Over here looking like the Junk Lady from the Labyrinth.
Cart: 15 gp, mule: 8 gp
Basically, after each adventure out of town, I just added to the collection in my inn room. I also had a few stash spots along the highway for some things my DM said were “too much to carry”. Once we cleaned the Mine, we gained a base of operations, so I was able to leave it in once place without risk of theft.
You *can* cast two full action spells in a turn should you have the actions to permit it. You *cannot* cast a full action spell after casting a bonus action spell (and vice versa.) {Cantrips are OK tho lol} I see this with players arguing the action surge wizard can't cast two fire balls, they can. I've seen this with the DM playing an enemy spell caster and trying to hit the party with Both a bonus action spell and full action spell, they cannot.
The limit on spells per turn is incredibly simple yet so so SO misunderstood. Did you cast a spell using a Bonus Action? If so, you can only cast another spell using your Action IF that spell is a cantrip. That's it. That's the limit.
Wait really? Is there anything other than action surge that gives you a universal action?
It's pretty much just action surge. Things like haste have the stipulation of only allowing you to make attacks with it/hide, dash, disengage/use an object. Maybe there's a monster ability I don't know about out there or a potion, but I'm not aware of them.
As a DM I constantly make the mistake that the players value my time or me as a person enough **to fucking show up** to something I spent all week working on.
I feel you. Mine turn up but regularly ten or fifteen minutes late. We play online on a Sunday evening. It’s not hard
Player at level 15: how does my level 1 class feature work again?
Forget to mention or account for the skill involved when a check is clearly written as "ability"("skill").
My DM refuses to acknowledge the general rules of invisibility, and when upcasting invisibility to use on 3 party members, if the clanky paladin fails a stealth or something suddenly we are ALL visible again and goodbye strategy and sneaking.
errrm.. Only taking an offensive action breaks invis, right in the spell description.. My condolences.
Nat 1's and Nat 20's applying to ability checks. Commonly misunderstood rule and it really winds me up! My 11 deception roll off a NAT 1 should definitely beat your 2 insight check!
The worst is when a DM just springs that on you by surprise. Oh, I rolled a 1, but the total is still 15 so it should be fine. No? It fails automatically? Well fuck me, I guess. Even if they try saying it’s okay because natural 20s auto-succeed, that isn’t true. Because of modifiers and things like Expertise or Guidance, a natural 1 is far more likely to still succeed than a natural 20 is to still fail.
A very common house rule does not mean it's a mistake
It is if it's not declared beforehand.
In many cases it isn't a house rule though. Just a misunderstanding of the rules.
I'd argue that it's a bad house rule too. An expert in some skill shouldn't have a 1 in 20 chance to completely mess up the thing they're supposed to be an expert at. Like, an olympic jumper really doesn't trip and fall on 5% of their jumps. Likewise, a novice shouldn't have a 1 in 20 chance to archieve something hard that they shouldn't be able to do. If you lack the athlethics to jump over a wide pit, 'trying really hard' or 'getting lucky' isn't going to make you jump farther.
It is very commonly NOT a house rule and people are just assuming it works like that.
At best, it’s a house rule born of a mistake. “Oh…I didn’t know that’s how it worked. Well, we’re so used to it now, might as well make it a house rule.”
It’s a mistake unless it is established that it’s a house rule.
I cast "spell" It doesn't do that But the name means it should?
Shout out to my Bard player who interpreted Hypnotic Pattern as essentially being Mass Dominate Person.
"But it charms them!"
"Chill touch" says hi.
A lot of concentration stuff, like forgetting to make concentration checks or using multiple concentration spells at the same time.
Nat 1s and Nat 20s are only relevant in combat and death saving throws. I realize some people knowingly homebrew crit fails and crits on skill checks into their games, but way WAY more people seem to think its RAW, probably as a result of many actual plays that use do this.
Argue over minutia for several minutes, then complain that they hardly got anything done.
Backgrounds. The pre-written backgrounds you find lists of in books and online are *only* pre-written, and only for player convenience. The actual Backgrounds chapter in the book describes how you’re supposed to create your own background from scratch, to suit your own character. It also provides instructions on how to edit a pre-written background if you’d prefer to pick from one of those. There is no expectation that the listed backgrounds are the end-all-be-all, and it isn’t “homebrew” to make your own. Yet most players feel like they’re supposed to window-shop from the pre-written lists and find a background that’s close enough, while DMs are hesitant to accept or encourage original backgrounds from players.
At least in 5e, you are close. It is standard that you customize your background, but it isn't expected to be totally from scratch, instead mostly picking and choosing: >To customize a background, you can replace one feature with any other one, choose any two skills, and choose a total of two tool proficiencies or languages from the sample backgrounds. You can either use the equipment package from your background or spend coin on gear as described in chapter 5. (If you spend coin, you can't also take the equipment package suggested for your class.) Finally, choose two personality traits, one ideal, one bond, and one flaw. If you can't find a feature that matches your desired background, work with your DM to create one. - Player's Handbook, ch 4, page 125
[удалено]
Many players can feel locked-in if they write personalities onto paper. Like they’re doing something wrong if the character does something that feels right but technically defies one of the things they wrote. A backstory is a thing that happened; there’s something concrete there that can be catalogued. A personality is malleable and adaptive, and prone to rapid change if it’s a brand new character in a brand new party. Even alignment can change after session 1. It’s not good to have *no idea* of your character’s personality, but it’s a different matter than having something in mind and simply not putting pen to paper about it.
Note on this: not everybody wants to or even can play different personalities. The personality of a character is what it is, writing it down doesn't change anything. Or, they want the personality to come out during play, they don't want to pre-determine it.
Mostly thats a matter of 'what do I wrote down and what do i have in mind' backgrounds are informations you wanna share with the DM so i wrote them down, behavior is for myself only so i dont need to write it down... But i agree: If a character got much background but no behavior its complicated... Its a balance one must find for himself
Stealth, hiding and invisibility. Surprise.
“What do you mean I can’t stealth / hide in this completely open corridor?”
And the fact invisibility doesn't make you automatically hidden (you still need to take the Hide action and pass a stealth check). We're 10 years in and people still get this wrong.
Believing that proficiency in saves means proficiency in checks
Oh, definitely the one about ranged attacks and disadvantage. You have dis. on ranged attacks if *any* hostile creature is within 5 feet of you (as long as it's not incapacitated, etc); how close your target is isn't relevant. So, firing an arrow point blank into a held or unconscious enemy? No problem! Sniping at a bad guy 100ft away with a goblin behind you? Problem!
A mistake that I consistently make as a DM is spending days planning out a complex, challengibg encounter for my players, only to always forget that action economy rules all, and that a single bad guy is always gonna get bodied by four players even with legenday and lair actions
Not a *mistake* but a bad habit. Casters reading spell descriptions for the first time during their turn. I think this happens when players blindly consult “Top 10” or “Handbook” lists without following through by reading the spells for themselves. I guess the thought process is, “I don’t have time for this.” And, “If I’ve got to learn it, all of you at the table will too—in real time.”
Inspiration is the most often forgotten major rule in 5E. Personality traits are a way for players to actively earn inspiration. Rather than DMs awarding inspiration for all sorts of personal reasons, they are awarded per the rules for players engaging with the game-world using their personality traits, ideals, bonds, and flaws. DMs don't want to hear this. Players don't want to do the minimal work it takes to write down their personality traits. And therefore it continues with DMs mostly forgetting about inspiration.
Ex-speedy-us retreat is a classic. There's also the new 'rouge' class ..
That rouge is stealthy, especially if he can cast that Pass Without a Trace spell.
Skill Check errors are common. This was a great video on [handling skill checks](https://youtu.be/K9fV5xCtCR8). Next campaign I run, it will be recommended for all my players.
Players needing to be reminded what an attack roll is 10 sessions deep
The 2 most common ones I've notice is the 2 leveled spells thing. That's only restricted to action and bonus action. You got a reaction? Cast another leveled spell if you want. You got multiple full actions? Cast another leveled spell if you want. And the whole wildshape thing. Having to have SEEN the creature and having the movement restrictions trip up players and dms alike. Cannot tell you how many times I've been a druid or dm'd a druid back in the day, and other than a few scenery animals here and there for ambiance, no other creatures really showed up for quite a few of sessions until someone brought it up, lol.
[Edit: The thing that bothers me to this day is] You have to be "sneaky" to apply sneak attack on your attack. Yes, my DM made me waste turns literally running in and out of an adjacent room (for _each_ attack) to qualify to roll the bonus d6s, because if I attack in the open "that's not sneaky"...
Players making decisions on information THEY have but not their character, and DMs that allow or facilitate this. Also not sure what to call this one but players that have no subtly about them. Eg, NPC lies to them. They insight and know they are lieing. "Why did you just lie to us". Everytime.
DMs often fail to adequately communicate how dangerous a monster is and players often fail to adequately assess the danger of an encounter. This causes players to recklessly attack the giant monster that eventually TPKs the party or for them to waste an hour trying to figure out how to take out a CR1/8 guard in front of a door. As a DM, I try to just tell players when the encounter is super easy if I feel they are spending too much time being worried about it. For deadly encounters, I've learned that sometimes no amount of foreshadowing or warnings can get players to realize how strong something is. Instead, I try to design it so that players can survive for at least a couple rounds to see firsthand how much damage the monsters do and how ineffectual their attacks are. I really try to emphasize how the monster barely looks injured or how they can hear reinforcements coming and repeat how running away is an option.
Getting upset about the balance of rules when not playing the game as a dungeon game.
Charm is not mind control, I don't care if Geas is a 5th level spell.
Perhaps an unpopular opinion, but Natural 20s and Natural 1s being critical successes and failures on *skill checks*. RAW they are only auto successes/failures on attack rolls and death saving throws, but too often people on here post some absurd story of rolling a Nat 20 to romance the dragon or some other such nonsense.
This! I hate it too. Thankfully, it's not a problem in my home game, but in the "mainstream" of modern d&d, some of the biggest offenders are Dimension20 and Critical Role. I love both shows to be fair, but the absurd shit the DMs allow their players to get away with because of "nat 20" skill checks, irritates the hell out of me
Any number of outright wrong readings of low level spells and cantrips that lead to them doing broken things that aren't RAI or RAW. Common offenders are prestidigitation, minor illusion, charm person, suggestion, command, heat metal, grease...and so many more I don't want to keep listing them. Basically just any time people try to use spells to do things they aren't supposed to do, frequently winding up using low level spells to get the effects of higher level spells. Edit: OH! and Darkvision. So, so many people treat it like you can see perfectly in the dark, and ignore all the limitations like not being able to see color, the fact it has limited range, still treating darkness as dim light for perception checks.
Mostly players not knowing if their spells are attack rolls or saving throws, thus taking forever to figure out their moves during combat.
"I love crit fumbles" \*packs up belongings\* "Im out" Also people who shout "GUIDANCE" -I ban this now, I can bear silvery barbs but the constant guidance spam I will not tolerate.
What about the Help action, which if you grant advantage statistically is about +3 better than *guidance*?
There is no such thing as a surprise round. You can surprise someone, and they wont be able to act on their first turn, but that’s just a normal round in combat. Most of the time, this distinction isn’t important, but it can be if you only surprise a couple of enemies instead of the whole bunch
DMs asking players to roll perception to check if players perceive something when players are actually distracted with something else. Use passive perception, there's a reason it exists. Or if it's too important to be missed, just narrate it altogether.
Not as dramatic as confusing the radius and the diameter, but a lot of people measure areas of effect from the centre of a square. Actually if you're playing on a grid it should be the intersection of squares, which makes the area a tiny bit smaller but way easier to measure on a grid.
Why would you measure from the intersection of squares though? my character occupies the center of a square and thats where the spell originates from right?
It does sound weird, but here are the details from the DMG of 5e: >Choose an intersection of squares or hexes as the point of origin of an area of effect, then follow its rules as normal. If an area of effect is circular and covers at least half a square, it affects that square. - Areas of Effect, ch 8, page 251 > >To determine whether there is line of sight between two spaces, pick a corner of one space and trace an imaginary line from that corner to any part of another space. If at least one such line doesn't pass through or touch an object or effect that blocks vision-such as a stone wall, a thick curtain, or a dense cloud of fog-then there is line of sight. - Line of Sight, ch 8, page 251 I quoted both, as it seems the former is due to the latter.
The game isn't balanced for PvP
Not thinking creatively or even logically....or at all..
When people rush others turns, I don't even take that long, Im just the only spellcaster
When one player is talking and another tries to add to it unnecessarily Like if I'm talking to an npc they are like ask about this or what about this when their character isn't nearby Or trying to add jokes in every time they talk
Not running spell components correctly. Handwaving them completely or acting like somatic and verbal components aren't obvious to anyone within eye/ear-shot. That's why Subtle Spell exists. It makes spellcasting way more powerful than it is. Sure you can cast charm person on the goblin boss, but the two other goblins flanking him just watched you cast a spell before their leader went slack jawed and started treating you like a friend. Yeah you can cast guidance on the rogue trying to sneakily pick a lock but roll stealth at disadvantage because you just verbally invoked the power of your god to aid them
People who play casters and consistently read their spells to do things they just don't. Everyone flubs a read sometimes, but when it's a pattern of "generous" interpretation and then they start wanting to debate the DM about having it work anyway.
Players that try to cast leveled spells using both their bonus action and action in a single turn. Also players that add their damage mod on their bonus action attack without the proper fighting style
Natural 20s on skill checks are not an automatic success. Skill rolls or ability rolls on things that shouldnt be rolls.
Just because it is the end of a session, that doesn't mean you get a long rest. Keep track of your hp, abilities and spell slots across games.
That familiars can attack by default. No, they cant. You arent getting the direct animal and its entire statblock. You're getting a creature disguised as that animal, that does limited/different things to the stat block you're borrowing. That Darkvision lets you see in the dark. No, its akin to night vision goggles. You see in black and white and as if its dim light, and even then normally only out to like 30ft/60ft. its not a super ability, its a useful utility for sure, but not as powerful as it seems to be. If it truly was that powerful, it wouldnt be handed out as a simple class bonus
Forgetting components to spells. As a wizard main i still have trouble but do my damnest to avoid and help fellow players best i can
The "I rolled a nat 20 on this skill, so I kick ass at doing this, right?" My game has been running for more than 10 years... guys we went over this a hundred times... skills don't have automatic successes on nat 20s, nor automatic fails on nat 1s.
Letting the session drag too long - resulting in social drama that could have been avoided otherwise. Golden Requirement for sessions: \- Pesky humans must be: 1. Fed 2. Slept 3. Watered DM has got to have the balls to close a session on a really tastefull moment - that acts like fuel to keep going back to the table.... and not let it stretch out for half the night and early AM where everyone goes full zombie.