D&D 5E DM imposed restrictions to the game (+)

[Greg K]

The only things that I did not vote for restricting were backgrounds and features. I suppose I might restrict backgrounds if they don't fit the campaign, but any backgrounds restricted mostly fall under restricted books. As for features, if I am going to ban a feature, I've probably already banned the class or subclass to which it is attached.

edit: I have to change my vote on features. Mountain Dwarf does not receive armor proficiency and dwarves do not get Darkvision

 

[Dire Bare]

Heh.

There is the way I WANT to run the game, and the way I DO run the game . . . .

I'm currently gaming with guys I've known since college or longer, and we are all veteran, card-carrying nerds with lots of RPG experience. We are all used to the traditional, "DM makes all the decisions" style of gaming, but are all willing to push ourselves into the more collaborative, modern styles of TTRPG gaming . . . to various degrees. Ironically, my players are more likely to restrict themselves than I am when its my turn to GM.

I own all the official books and a lot of 3rd party content. Which I would happily let them use. My players each have the PHB and most of them have Tasha's plus another title or two. I'm the only one who uses D&D Beyond. They usually restrict themselves to what they already own. And even beyond that, they usually stick to the more classic races and classes . . . rarely a tiefling or dragonborn or warlock or artificer.

I'm perfectly happy running a standard D&D game with no restrictions at all. All the official stuff, any third-party stuff, even player homebrew. I have the luxury of a lot of trust with this group of folks, and I'm not worried about them bringing something super broken to the table to gain advantage.

With other players, I might feel differently. I've had some bad experiences with players creating their own, weird, homebrew classes or races that are broken and don't play well with others.

I'm hoping, next time its my turn to run a game, to try out a more collaborative approach . . . I've picked up the Arium RPG add-on, I just got my copy of the Session Zero System a few days ago, I'm currently reading the "Game Master's Handbook of Proactive Roleplaying" . . . but I'm not sure my players will be fully comfortable with the shift in focus from "DM as GOD" to, "This is OUR game!".

 

[humble minion]

Depends on the campaign, really.

Here's the character creation house rules for the Dragonlance game that I'm starting up this week - https://docs.google.com/document/d/...ouid=116758860872678777448&rtpof=true&sd=true

There's a mix there, race restrictions to fit into the world, notes on how magic fits into the world (divine magic in particular for a War of the Lance era campaign), house-rules to fix busted stuff, house-rules to open up possibilities of concepts the core rules don't support. A large list of stuff that is available no questions asked and suggested stuff that does fit well, but 'rule 0' means that i'm willing to break the rules if you can convince me that your concept is cool and fits the world.

For a spelljammer or FR game, this list would be must less restrictive, probably. For Dark Sun it'd probably be more restrictive in places. Horses for courses and all that.

 

[GnomeWorks]

When checking if a person would be a good fit, before I tell them anything about how my table works, I ask what they'd like to play from core. If the answer is "tiefling" or "warlock," they're not a good fit.

No core races other than human (and I only do variant human, not vanilla), and the ones I've homebrewed for my setting.

No core classes, my homebrew classes are the only ones allowed. There are 63, each with at least 4 subclasses: you do not lack for options.

Feats and backgrounds -- anything goes, any source, so long as I can access it. Non-core stuff requires approval. Backgrounds specific to other settings are, of course, not allowed unless it can be refluffed.

 

[schm0]

My restrictions are as follows:

1. No MtG books. (I do allow the subclasses, though)
2. No Wildemount books (spells, races, etc.)
3. I typically don't allow third party homebrew. Homebrew is like smelling farts. I prefer my own. It'd have to be some really awesome homebrew for me to get behind it.
4. In addition to the previous material, I also don't allow monstrous races or flying races.
5. No Artificer. I like to distribute magic items, and artificers are very rare in my setting.
6. Spells are limited to the following: PHB, XGtE, TCoE, IDRotF and FToD.
7. No multiclassing

I run pretty much exclusively in the Forgotten Realms, so a lot of the above is to create a heroic adventure experience that runs smoothly and fits into that world without too much conflict with the lore.

 

[Zardnaar]

Well it's official next game is Norse themed Midgard after CoS.

So going with spotlighted races. PHB and Midgard PHB is mostly fine beside Elves snd Drow.

Not sure on spotlighted races but it will include Goliaths, Trollkin, Dwarves, Humans, Bearfolk, Shadow Fey (basically shadow elves) and Winterfolk Halflings.

 

[Distracted DM]

I have a bit of everything restricted on the poll list. With 5e I ended up with: PHB+Xanathar's were ok, subclasses from other books were permitted but subject to change. Everything else, please keep to PHB and Xanathar's but you could ask about certain feats etc.

I switched to A5E almost a year ago but still have some restrictions, like No Gnomes. Gnomes in my setting are an underground monster.

 

[Zardnaar]

I have a bit of everything restricted on the poll list. With 5e I ended up with: PHB+Xanathar's were ok, subclasses from other books were permitted but subject to change. Everything else, please keep to PHB and Xanathar's but you could ask about certain feats etc.

I switched to A5E almost a year ago but still have some restrictions, like No Gnomes. Gnomes in my setting are an underground monster.

Don't think anyone cares that much about Gnomes. I've seen 3 rolled up in 30 years. 1 per edition.

 

[Storyteller Hero]

I'm okay with any 3rd party material as long as it comes from a source or author with searchable reviews, plus everyone at the table has to be okay with it. That requirement tends to eliminate most if not all problematic 3rd party materials from consideration.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Couldn't vote. The only meaningful "restriction" I bring is that I don't have the ability to run for unrepentant (meaning, absolute a-hole with no desire to change) evil. Since alignment isn't one of the listed options, but it isn't true to say that I truly limit nothing, I can't really vote.

I will say, part of how I do this is...I work on developing the fine details of the world after I know what my players are interested in playing. That way, there can be no conflict. I can't get upset they asked for something I didn't account for. Often, I'll have some kind of premise or concept early on. But I just don't really see the point of hammering everything to the floor before the preliminary discussions. It's not hard to ask folks what classes and/or races they're interested in playing, so I can make sure those things are already present.

Don't think anyone cares that much about Gnomes. I've seen 3 rolled up in 30 years. 1 per edition.

Oh, but we know gnomes are terribly important. Important enough to boycott an edition over.