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

[Tony Vargas]

while this is great for Star Trek (after all, I'm totally for a universe of bipedal aliens differentiated by forehead ridges!), I'm not so sure I love it in my D&D.

D&D fantasy races are prettymuch all bipedal. More ears & noses doing the differentiating, tho.

Allow me to explain. First, the earth cooled. And then dinosaurs came, but they got too big and fat....

Airplane.

In the beginning, there were a few classes. A stout fighting man. A puny magic man. A thieving, um, thieving man.

We may not know whether the chicken or the egg came first, but we do know that the D&D Cleric came before the D&D Thief.

And, honestly, they were probably men just based on probabilities. Things weren't too enlightened back then.

1974? C'mon.

And if you wanted to play a demo-human (literally, less than human), you could.

Wouldn't the demo-human would be the floor model?
A half-human would be demi-human. Half-elves and half-orcs were demi-humans. Elves, dwarves, halflings, gnomes, balrogs, etc were non-human.

Now this is a relic of the past. Tiefling druid? Sure. Triton monk? Why not. Halfling wizard?

There could certainly be some 'classes' that would seem to work only for a race (or culture) or setting (or region). That's where PrCs could do some good.

As pointed out in another thread- why do we have to see all of these 3' halflings with 3' rapiers? I have three possible theories for this-

I have three possible theories for this-

1. It's like poetry. Sure, free verse is great, but it's like playing poetry without a net. Playing with restrictions can be fun; to a certain extent, it's no fun breaking rules if there are no rules to break.

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

3. I'm old, and I need to get people off of my lawn.

So what do y'all think?

(3)

Also a 3' halfling with a 3' rapier isn't all that crazy. 6' humans used 13' lances.

Is it an unquestioned good that there are no longer any restrictions? Should I bow to the forces of modernity and the wisdom of Star Trek? Or should I give in to the crotchety inner voice which is telling me that it just feels wrong?

Yes.

 

[Coroc]

I answered that infinite diversity is good, but I could also lean towards "I'm not sure, but Paladins are terrible."
Because paladins are the problem. Or your (and many other peoples') ideas of what a paladin is are too restrictive.

D&D has always had this issue, as you hit upon. A fighting-man is something I do, and elf is something that I am, why are they both classes? The more descriptive a class is with regards to what you are instead of what you do, and the more problems arise. Paladin has always trod this line. In some people it is very much a "what I am" class. You are a paragon of virtue, the knight in shining armor ideal. It's an idea very much tied to real world religions and mythologies, and not so much to the fantastical world of D&D.

And so various attempts have been made to redefine the paladin more as a 'What I do' class, and some people embrace it and some people have lawn related issues. But either way, paladin is the problem, not race/class freedom.

I think most players do not play a paladin like it should be: A paladin (no matter what oath) is a zealot, others would eventually say an extremist.

E.G. Correctly roleplaying the pally is him assaulting a dragon or a force of mobs outnumbering him even if the odds he will die in the attempt are 10 : 1 if it is for his agenda.

I think in 2e players handbook or dmg there was somewhere the sentence most pally do not die of old age.

I do not know many players who for the sake of roleplay would act like that although I know at least one (He played a priest, but his RP would qualify for a pally, he was willing to sacrifice himself for an npc under his protection in urging the drow priestess who held both to take him as a sacrifice instead of the npc)

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Coroc]

View attachment 88505

....um.... some things have definitely changed for the better.

Um, and some have taken an utter turn for the worse. But I get in danger of violating this forums rules if I would answer this in more detail so please do not ask. (Nowadays is she still selects the furniture but kicks you out for your opinion on Vietnam )

 

[Xeviat]

Since the PCs are often the exceptional people of the world, I prefer no restrictions on classes/races/alignment for them. For world building, I may restrict things, but that would be for the common NPCs.

Restrictions are fine in WoW, where there are millions of players. But there are only a handful of players at your table. Let them be what they want. Tieflings and Warforged aren't a part of my setting, but if someone wanted to be one I'd find a way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Krachek]

The infinite diversity is already there with the multiple tables and the multiple play style we heard about in this community.
If a Gnome paladin was an aberration 30 years ago, it is more commonly accepted theses days.

Any Dm with high expectation is practically forced to homebrew some parts of the game.
Strategy and balance, character creation, downtime, monsters, treasures, and so on.
Hopefully the design allow such home brew without big problems.

 

[Coroc]

Since the PCs are often the exceptional people of the world, I prefer no restrictions on classes/races/alignment for them. For world building, I may restrict things, but that would be for the common NPCs.

Restrictions are fine in WoW, where there are millions of players. But there are only a handful of players at your table. Let them be what they want. Tieflings and Warforged aren't a part of my setting, but if someone wanted to be one I'd find a way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well if at my table someone would want to play a warforged in a greyhawk campaign I would resolve this in suggesting a eberron setting for the next campaign eventually, case solved. (I do allow tieflings though, even they afaik did not exist in Greyhawk, only of batezuu (devil) heritage not demon offspring bec. they would be of the enemy faction for campaign reasons, but no one wanted to play one)

 

[Ath-kethin]

I require all new players (new to my campaigns, anyway, I don't discriminate based on how long a person has been gaming) to play a gnome paladin for at least a year before they can give some of the less useful classes a go. I find it helps develop them as players, as people, and generally improves the world at large.

I don't know - it seems a lot of the implied issues are ones here where the easiest fix is to stop assuming it's a problem.

I can't agree more with this statement. I don't think there are any problems in D&D that aren't introduced by people who want there to be problems.

I answered "special uniquest snowflake work of art" in the poll because I limit the hell out of classes (and races) in my games, and I would have no gripe with the rules limiting them exactly the same way I do. But I also have no problem with the game placing no limitations at all on them, since most people play in games that I don't run, and they can do whatever they want.

I've even heard (keep this on the DL) that some people don't absolutely worship the very concept of gnome Paladins. And if the game has room for those weirdos, it has room for everybody.

 

[Lanefan]

There is a big difference between a publisher making everything available, and a DM dumping everything into a campaign or a setting.

Problem is, though, if everything's available as published but a DM only uses some of it then the DM inevitably gets painted as the bad guy.

DM: "There's no tieflings, dragonborn, or other whacked-out races in this campaign."
Prospective player: "No tieflings?! That's unacceptable! They're part of the game - it says so in the Players' Handbook, right here!"
DM: "They're not part of any game I run."
PP: "See ya." (then goes out and complains to all and sundry about what a horrible DM this one is)
DM: "Right, then - let's get started..." (goes on to run an amazing game)

DM's should decide what they want to make available.

Oh, I completely agree. But verily, the Age of Player Entitlement is upon us. Repent, o ye DMs! Repent!"

Lanefan

 

[ccs]

Sure. Write the rules to accommodate any combo.

And then restrict things from there based on setting, personal taste, AL whims, & whatever.