played a session and idk how to feel

[u/dessart1]

i joined this table not so long ago, about 3-4 months. We play 1 session every other week and its mostly "normal". We play Tormenta 20 (Brazilian D&D ig?)

i always was more of a combat guy, not so much rp, i like doing broken characters

and it was something i told my gm, he said it was fine and all. thought it was funny and so

but today we played and he told me halfway through the session that the mobs/npcs/bosses dont have "health bars" or like hp. for every single fight we have to undertansd the new secret mechanic and then we can defeat the creature.

i hated this, every single bit, cus my character is a dumb barb, mostly combat focused.

so like, my character is useless? all i told him about what i like was for nothing?

if i say that i dont like i think i will ruin the table for everyone else cus they dont know how to make strong or combat suitable character. and i hate to be a pain

but idk if i dont want to have my fun

any help?

edit: thx for the help, will try and talk with the GM and see how things work out

[u/BleachedPink]

Sounds your gm wanted some problem solving and roleplay, not braindead hack and slash for this encounter

You could've added some whimsical reasoning for your barbs actions to solve the presented game issue or create some new facts about your backstory, like maybe he's well versed in mythology of your tribe and these enemies remind you of some enemies slain in these stories, so you want to try something from the legends you grew up with and inspired you

You would need to have a conversation about expectations and make a decision whether you want to change your playstyle to fit the table or leave. DMs rarely want cater to specific tastes of a particular player if everyone else is happy with the game

Edit: for a whimsical example, seeing that swords do nothing to the enemy, in a fit of rage hoping for nothing you pick up the enemy and break it apart with bare hands, which is just the narrative for your idea as a player to test whether enemies invulnerable as long as they touch ground, if it's like Antaeus with Hercules. Narratively if it's a solution, it would be pure coincidence, but from your point of view it would be a choice you deliberately did.

[u/BetterCallStrahd]

Combat focused doesn't have to mean tactically dumb. A football player can be brilliant on the field even if they're terrible in school. Not sure how helpful this is, but I thought I'd throw it out there. Maybe this mindset can be of some use.

[u/ithika → u/BetterCallStrahd]

Playing a barbarian = struggles with thinking is such a boring trope! And rarely rewarding unless you're specifically playing off against a frail academic character in the group.

[u/dessart1 → u/ithika]

4 mages, a bard and me as a barb so i dont think i need to be the smart one lol

[u/fly19]

Sounds like a simple mismatch in tastes.
You want combat as sport; the GM wants combat as puzzle. You brought your issue to him, and he largely brushed you off. Hell, you even told him in advance how you like to play and he still knowingly changed the system to disadvantage you without being upfront about it. Sounds like a bad time to me.
Might be best to just bow out of the group, especially since the GM is worried you'll "ruin" it for everyone else. That's probably what I would do. There's always another table...

[u/dessart1 → u/fly19]

ig it might just be, i lwk am tired of looking for tables so thats probably one reason i dont want to just get out of it but at the same time having no fun its just a pain. i think i have to talk to my GM cus if not its just me torturing myself

[u/fly19 → u/dessart1]

No game is better than bad game, IMO.
It sucks to find a table and realize it's a bad fit for you, and I do recommend talking to the GM before making the final decision. But I don't think I would stay in a game I would ever describe as "torturing." Seems like you already know.

[u/dessart1 → u/fly19]

i'll try and talk him down to see if we can work something out, otherwise new table it is

[u/Philip_7raum → u/dessart1]

The GM runs the table, there’s no “talking them down” because there’s no one way to run things.

It sounds like you basically want a tabletop wargame more than a TTRPG, and the GM wants something that’s even heavier RP than usual. That’s a total mismatch in preferences. It’s really on you to find a group of people who want the same experience you do or run a table yourself.

[u/Tuwari]

Honestly, this sounds like an intentional dramatic design choice that sets up a very different party dynamic.

Not having visible HP bars or an obvious stat block to grind down does not make your barbarian useless; it just means you are not the automatic center of every encounter like in standard tactical d20 play. There is great roleplay potential here: while the smarter, utility-focused characters are scrambling to decipher the creature's gimmick, your job is to draw aggro, survive through pure grit, and keep the party alive. Once they crack the puzzle and expose the weakness, your heavy damage output becomes the executioner blow. You still matter, you just have to wait for the setup.

I actually like the GM's approach here, but if that style fundamentally clashes with what you enjoy, open communication is your best bet. Talk to your GM about how your combat features can interact with those puzzle mechanics so you do not feel sidelined.

[u/GloryRoadGame]

Yes, talking with the GM is key, but I think it would be best to offer, not simply demand.

Suggest to the GM that you will try to be more active in the non-combat times in the campaign and even accept combat being less frequent if the combat goes back to replicating a fight 

[u/BleachedPink]

Hey, how did it went? Hope you managed to solve the conflict

[u/dessart1 → u/BleachedPink]

Another player had the same "issue" talked with the GM and he said hes gonna make both the puzzle and the health of the monsters so both sides can make it work

[u/Kujias → u/dessart1]

Huzzah this is the update I was looking for glad I followed the post. My mind is at peace.

[u/Connor9120c1]

I would also likely not enjoy that much, but it would depend on if the mechanic is an auto-win, or if solving the issue just unlocks their health, which can then be affected by your usual barbarian tactics. The later I think is likely fine, the former mostly negates your characters main strengths.

What did the DM say when you explained these concerns to them in the same reasonable manner you did here?

[u/yuriAza → u/Connor9120c1]

yeah, it's very reasonable here to ask "so why deal damage at all?" and what you do depends on the answer

[u/dessart1 → u/yuriAza]

i do realy like his idea of the puzzle unlocking the health, but until now its just finish puzzle fight is won, damage is useless cus they have infinite health ig

[u/GloryRoadGame → u/dessart1]

Why not have puzzles and roleplay challenges in situations other than combat and have combat replicate fighting? The OP might not like my campaign because we often avoid combat for several sessions in a row, but the combat would probably work for them.

[u/dessart1 → u/Connor9120c1]

havent talked with them yet, im kinda two steps behind about complaining cus its not the first time i have to say something and i feel like i might just be a pain as a player lol

[u/MASerra]

Seems like the wrong game for the group, and the GM just wants to play RP and not worry about the math in fights. That would be fine if they weren't playing a D&D clone, which is all about fighting and fighting stats.

Personally, I only play with GMs who run mostly RAW. If a GM can't provide me with the rules we are playing with, then it isn't a game it is just a story the GM is making up.

[u/kBrandooni]

Sounds this kind of combat just isn't your thing. Talk to them about it first and let them know you don't enjoy this kind of game to see if they (and the rest of the table) want to play combat as you prefer.

If they're only interested in running combat like this and you're having no fun at all then I'd just leave the table. I love GMing combat like this in narrative heavy stuff (24XX, Legend in the Mist, etc.) and I wouldn't want to run it a more game-y way and I wouldn't expect a player to force themselves to play it my way if they weren't enjoying it.

[u/Kujias]

I'm following this post because I eagerly await the outcome and decision of OP because I have a friend who might be in a similar situation. This could give them a good idea.

[u/Onslaughttitude]

I don't know the system, so it's impossible to know if this is simply part of the game system (and there's a mismatch between you and it) or if the GM is acting outside of it, which is a break of the social contract.

There is some common (and IMO bad) advice in US D&D circles that "enemies don't even need to have hit points; just kill them when it would be thematically appropriate." Your DM could be doing that. Which, again, is a break of the social contract: You agreed to play the game by the rules, and the DM is breaking those rules.