One of my players wants to play a kid wizard like Harry Potter. Should i allow it?

One of my players wants to play a young girl...

...the exact age wasn't really specified but this player saw a cool pic online and thought it would be a great idea to be a child prodigy ready for an adventure. By the looks of the picture she saw online, it looks like the child is probably a "tween" or a bit earlier, say 8 to 13 years old?

She cites stories like Harry Potter and Aria Stark (Game of Thrones) who have gone on very important adventures and saved the world!

I actually like the idea, but there are a few things i wanted to get your opinions on here on the boards...

First, we are playing Tomb of Annihilation, and there is only one small port city on the jungle island with almost everything else being dangerous jungle terrain filled with flash rainstorms, monsters, disease, and the the like. So as a student, it makes sense for her to be in the city, where she could study safety in a school environment, of course.

My question is:

Who? and how in the world does she think she will ever be invited to go on a serious world shattering quest to find a cure for the Death Curse deep in the middle of the perilous jungles of Chult?

A party is being formed to go on this quest, and i just don't see NPCs recruiting kids...even if she was the smartest kid in class. Neither do i see other party members wanting to invite a kid to join them on this quest as well.

Kids are to be protected and nurtured. They are not asked to "save the world" and leave the safety of the town to go explore ruins, fight undead, or explore deadly tombs.

So, this player decided to either hide in the pack mule or someones travel pack or something, or perhaps, even trail behind and follow the group along at a distance.

I told her that she would have to hide or travel along at a distance for several days while the party travels from the city through the jungle to their destination all the while staying quiet, not eating or drinking, and hoping that when the group rests for camp that no one opens up the suitcase she is hiding in. or if she is following at a distance, she would not be able to enjoy the campfire and just hide in the wet jungle until the group is ready to break camp the next day. And suppose the group finds her or when she ultimately decides to reveal herself, I still don't see how anyone in the party or an NPC would want to take a kid along on this quest. Anyone in their right mind, would send the kid back to town where she would be back in safety and out of harms way.

It just doesn't make sense to me.

I didn't say no to her idea. I just warned her of the potential drawbacks. I actually like her idea, but just not for this campaign. I think this sort of character would be great for the next Waterdeep adventure path, perhaps accidentally stumbling upon Undermountain or something. But in this case, I don't see how or why anyone would think it would be a good idea to quest with a kid tagging along.

Am i being unreasonable? Is there a way to let this happen? If anyone could help "spin" her background to make this work, I'm open minded...

Thanks in advance.

I would say "Yes."

Moreover, I would say "Yes... and here's why the NPCs specifically recruited this kid..." then figure out something that makes sense and is awesome.

It's really very easy once you stop thinking of reasons to say "No."

Short Round contributed more to his adventuring party than half of the adults did. If Temple of Doom could do it, I'm sure you can justify it easily enough.

iserith said:

I would say "Yes."

Moreover, I would say "Yes... and here's why the NPCs specifically recruited this kid..." then figure out something that makes sense and is awesome.

It's really very easy once you stop thinking of reasons to say "No."

Click to expand...

This might be a "yes, but..." scenario. It doesn't seem unreasonable to remind the player of the likely reactions to a small child in these circumstances. Of course, since these reactions are mostly going to be coming from the other party members, it's kind of out of the DM's hands. Me, I'd allow it, and let the PCs fall where they may.

This also can be a good chance for a kid disguised, and have it be a secret from the other players. A warlock that can cast disguise self away will or a charlatan proficient in the disguise kit. Nobody knows until it is too late.

TheCosmicKid said:

This might be a "yes, but..." scenario. It doesn't seem unreasonable to remind the player of the likely reactions to a small child in these circumstances. Of course, since these reactions are mostly going to be coming from the other party members, it's kind of out of the DM's hands. Me, I'd allow it, and let the PCs fall where they may.

Click to expand...

Here I agree with Ned Stark on everything before the word "but" not counting.

*Deleted by user*

lowkey13 said:

Sure.

People play tiny, stupid humans so often in D&D campaigns that we have a special name for them.

Halflings.

Click to expand...

So what you're saying is that gnomes aren't stupid?

lowkey13 said:

Sure.

People play tiny, stupid humans so often in D&D campaigns that we have a special name for them.

Halflings.

Click to expand...

Exactly!

iserith said:

Here I agree with Ned Stark on everything before the word "but" not counting.

Click to expand...

Okay: "There may be some unusual reactions to a child appearing in this context, but yes."