D&D 5E Is infinite diversity in infinite combinations .... a terrible thing in D&D?

jayoungr · Sep 15, 2017

lowkey13 said:
2. There's something to be said about traditions and tropes in gaming.

Honestly, I think this is the key. Sometimes you want something fresh to shake you up and surprise you; but sometimes a well-done example of a classic trope just hits harder, or at least hits a different place, than something new and surprising. It's probably a pendulum swing: the tropes get to feeling tired for enough people, and then they make different stuff, and the new stuff becomes such a flood that the original tropes start to feel fresh again, back and forth.

Lanefan · Sep 15, 2017

BoldItalic said:
Conflict only arises if a player brings along a favourite character and you flatly tell him he can't play it because you are an inflexible autocrat who doesn't want any creative input from the players because it's your narrative not theirs. In which case, I have no sympathy with you.

Er...what's a player doing "bringing along a favourite character" in the first place? Both as player and DM when I or someone else enters a new game (or an existing game as a new player) I fully expect a new character - rolled up using that game's system and adhering to that game's rules and restrictions - to be part of that entry process.

Lanefan

Ancalagon · Sep 15, 2017

BoldItalic said:
Conflict only arises if a player brings along a favourite character and you flatly tell him he can't play it because you are an inflexible autocrat who doesn't want any creative input from the players because it's your narrative not theirs. In which case, I have no sympathy with you.

Do you allow hyper-inteligent shades of blue as characters?

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using EN World mobile app

Jacob Marley · Sep 15, 2017

Ancalagon said:
A hyper-inteligent shade of blue? No?

Well then there *are* restrictions in your game.

From what I've read of his posts, I don't see any reason why we should restrict [MENTION=20564]Blue[/MENTION] from playing D&D with us.

Mercule · Sep 15, 2017

By the RAW, there should be no limitations -- toolkit the thing. By campaign setting, knock yourself out. It might even be a good thing for the rules to encourage.

Any proposed Greyhawk setting book would probably benefit from some sort of race/class matrix. It might even be interesting to add level caps, encouraging multi-classing.

Sunseeker · Sep 15, 2017

The rules of a game like D&D should be more akin to your table, as the dictionary is to your essay.

D&D, IMO, is more akin to a rule set and because of that should be as open, interchangeable and "hackable" as possible. If You want to limit your home table to no paladins, no gnomes, or no tiefling barbarians then that's your prerogative. You can make your table as restrictive or as open as you feel is appropriate to the game you want to play.

I don't feel that, at this time in D&D's development, built-in restrictions on races, class and dare I say alignments, are beneficial to it's existence as a game. Official D&D campaigns may limit races and classes and combinations thereof, and while I might argue against that it's their want to do so. 3PP campaigns and individual DMs may do the same as is equally their want. But I see no benefit in hardcoding a specific flavor of restrictions in the game like this.

Blue · Sep 15, 2017

BoldItalic said:
Conflict only arises if a player brings along a favourite character and you flatly tell him he can't play it because you are an inflexible autocrat who doesn't want any creative input from the players because it's your narrative not theirs. In which case, I have no sympathy with you.

"I understand that you are attached to your 10th level Gnome Cleric of Garl Glittergold. But we're starting up a new Dark Sun game and the setting has neither gnomes, clerics, nor to be honest Garl Glittergold. Dark Sun has a different theme then the traditional faux-European medieval-wth-magic setting. Here's the one page intro I wrote up, take a look and see what leaps out at you that you'd liek to try. There are some new options in there as well like Muls that you never would have had a chance to play before."

That seems reasonable, not autocratic. And really isn't about the narrative at all, it's about the theme of the setting.

I'm currently running 13th Age's Dragon Empire and I have a lot of player authorship in defining the world like you imply, including wiping out the concept of Dragonborn except for one PC who wanted to be the only one. But I've also run and been in games that thematically can use a sub-set, super-set, or both of the options available in the PHB. That doesn't make the DM a dictator.

nswanson27 · Sep 15, 2017

Blue said:
"I understand that you are attached to your 10th level Gnome Cleric of Garl Glittergold. But we're starting up a new Dark Sun game and the setting has neither gnomes, clerics, nor to be honest Garl Glittergold. Dark Sun has a different theme then the traditional faux-European medieval-wth-magic setting. Here's the one page intro I wrote up, take a look and see what leaps out at you that you'd liek to try. There are some new options in there as well like Muls that you never would have had a chance to play before."

That seems reasonable, not autocratic. And really isn't about the narrative at all, it's about the theme of the setting.

I'm currently running 13th Age's Dragon Empire and I have a lot of player authorship in defining the world like you imply, including wiping out the concept of Dragonborn except for one PC who wanted to be the only one. But I've also run and been in games that thematically can use a sub-set, super-set, or both of the options available in the PHB. That doesn't make the DM a dictator.

But I think the point here is that it could be about narrative instead instead setting. Or, as you pointed out, it could be about setting and not narrative. Context is everything here.

transtemporal · Sep 15, 2017

I don't see why its a bad thing. The races tend towards certain classes because of their stat bonuses and those tend to mirror the classic tropes anyway; elves are wizards, halflings are rogues, humans are anything.

But if someone wants to play a non-optimal race/class combination like a gnome monk or goliath monk (who are both in my current group), more power to 'em. The PCs are supposed to be exceptional individuals, and whats more exceptional than going against the traditions of your people to forge a different path?

BoldItalic · Sep 16, 2017

Lanefan said:
Er...what's a player doing "bringing along a favourite character" in the first place? Both as player and DM when I or someone else enters a new game (or an existing game as a new player) I fully expect a new character - rolled up using that game's system and adhering to that game's rules and restrictions - to be part of that entry process.

Ah, but I don't, you see. You may run your favourite character in my game any time (as long as it's not too different in level from the rest of the PCs) or bring along your own pregen. Whatever.

Ancalagon said:
Do you allow hyper-inteligent shades of blue as characters?

Sounds cool. Do you have an amusing explanation for how your Int came to exceed 20? I can work with a backstory like that.

Blue said:
"I understand that you are attached to your 10th level Gnome Cleric of Garl Glittergold. But we're starting up a new Dark Sun game and the setting has neither gnomes, clerics, nor to be honest Garl Glittergold. Dark Sun has a different theme then the traditional faux-European medieval-wth-magic setting. Here's the one page intro I wrote up, take a look and see what leaps out at you that you'd liek to try. There are some new options in there as well like Muls that you never would have had a chance to play before."

That seems reasonable, not autocratic. And really isn't about the narrative at all, it's about the theme of the setting.

I'm currently running 13th Age's Dragon Empire and I have a lot of player authorship in defining the world like you imply, including wiping out the concept of Dragonborn except for one PC who wanted to be the only one. But I've also run and been in games that thematically can use a sub-set, super-set, or both of the options available in the PHB. That doesn't make the DM a dictator.

Would you allow me to play my 10th level Gnome Cleric of Garl Glittergold if I come up with an amusing explanation of how he arrived in a world where there are no other gnomes and no other clerics and no-one worships any gods, let alone Garl Glittergold, but where my spells still work because Mystic?

D&D 5E Is infinite diversity in infinite combinations .... a terrible thing in D&D?

Should all classes be open to all races in all things always?

Yes! Infinite diversity in infinite combinations is a good thing!

No! I play my tennis with a net.

Neither yes nor no; I will explain below why your poll options cannot constrain me.

Get off my lawn.

I'm not sure, but Paladins are terrible.

jayoungr

Legend

Lanefan

Victoria Rules

Ancalagon

Dusty Dragon

Jacob Marley

Adventurer

Mercule

Adventurer

Sunseeker

Guest

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal

nswanson27

First Post

transtemporal

Explorer

BoldItalic

First Post

Similar Threads