D&D 5E Enforcing theme/structure by saying NO to players

[The Human Target]

Most of those wouldn't bother me. Same with palindromes or other similar types.

I'm talking about stuff like Bearackobama (druid). Don't get me wrong, some of them are completely hilarious, but it ends up skewing the whole mood of the game on a dime.

I mean I agree I hate those joke names, I'm just saying its always been a part of D&D from day one.

 

[Celtavian]

I used to limit players based on theme or setting. Now I find ways to work character choices into what I'm doing. I don't bother to limit a player. I don't like limiting their fun.

 

[Gnashtooth]

Most of those wouldn't bother me. Same with palindromes or other similar types.

I'm talking about stuff like Bearackobama (druid). Don't get me wrong, some of them are completely hilarious, but it ends up skewing the whole mood of the game on a dime.

Man I liked Gary but I just couldn't dig that sort of self-aggrandizement in the written material. It's lame, dated humor. I'm glad some of those names have been dropped from the the spells over time.

That kind of thing was all over the 1st edition modules, and the first ones I started buying were where the game started taking itself more seriously, along with the wonderful corporate high-polish production values that came in around 1983.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Man I liked Gary but I just couldn't dig that sort of self-aggrandizement in the written material. It's lame, dated humor. I'm glad some of those names have been dropped from the the spells over time.

That kind of thing was all over the 1st edition modules, and the first ones I started buying were where the game started taking itself more seriously, along with the wonderful corporate high-polish production values that came in around 1983.

This is a game with rust monsters, owlbears, and flumphs. Silly names barely register on the radar.

 

[Gnashtooth]

This is a game with rust monsters, owlbears, and flumphs. Silly names barely register on the radar.

The tone changed, and the stories in the modules became more serious, thanks in part to all those ecology articles. What "radar"?

 

[ExploderWizard]

The tone changed, and the stories in the modules became more serious, thanks in part to all those ecology articles.

More serious?

The original G series which are some of the earlier modules are written with the premise that the PCs must put an end to the giant raids or face execution. Thats pretty serious. There have always been modules more serious in tone than others. I'm not aware of a universal time line dating a crossover from silly to serious.

What "radar"?

The detection system that registers and defines "silly" in a D&D game.

 

[Demonspell]

At our table, when we alter/remove races and classes for a specific world setting, we have a player that complains that everything isn't available, and doesn't like restrictions. I am not a fan of shoehorning something in just because a player wants to play it, and neither is the other DM at our table. For example, we've played in Dragonlance and there have been disputes over the restriction on spell schools/Tower of High Sorcery test at 3rd level, and what races are available (no Tieflings, Dragonborn or Halflings, but Kender and Minotaurs are playable.) This comes up as well when that player is the odd person out when it comes to alignment.

We've also leaned against certain characters being played because it would derail the adventure too badly (i.e. playing a Draconian in DL1, or dwarf wizards)

Do you ever have players complain about restrictions/changes based on theme?

I have NEVER had the need to restrict races or classes, but then I usually play in a homebrew world that is fairly open. That said, it seems to me that the Player at issues doesn't understand or buy into the campaign setting.

I never run a campaign randomly. Usually, I have an idea for a campaign, and I will message my friends with the details of the idea and ask who is interested. My details include a brief synopsis of the introduction with a list of broad "roles" that are open for consideration. I tell everyone that I will accept the first person for each role will receive an invite.

Establishing the roles in my campaigns helps provide some limiting factors on what potential players come up with; however, it also gives them a bit of creative spark to figure out how their character fits in the world. In a sense its an artificial means of controlling race and class without actually telling anyone that is what you are doing.

 

[Greg K]

Some don't like this, however, and that tends to be because they have a hard time buying into the "reality" of the setting if it's not created beforehand by the DM. I don't particularly get that though. Some of the most immersive games I've played have been with this sort of dynamic.

I am that player. Just saying you are running D&D or make your character and I will fit in is not enough. Your setting and its "reality" are huge in attracting me or making me walk (as are the other players and the group's playstyle). Without information set as to the feel of the setting, its races and their cultures/nations, deities (including their priests and priesthoods), etc. , I don't have the information as to whether or not your campaign is worth my time and interest, because all those things help define the setting and feel of the game.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

I am that player. Just saying you are running D&D or make your character and I will fit in is not enough. Your setting and its "reality" are huge in attracting me or making me walk (as are the other players and the group's playstyle). Without information set as to the feel of the setting, its races and their cultures/nations, deities (including their priests and priesthoods), etc. , I don't have the information as to whether or not your campaign is worth my time and interest, because all those things help define the setting and feel of the game.

Are you specific as to what method by which you are able to get the information you are looking for? I mean, would I absolutely have to have it all written out and detailed to give you to read, or would it be sufficient if I were to have you ask me questions you wanted to know the answers to and I provided answers that gave the information you wanted and remained consistent for later inquiries by way of me documenting my answers after the fact?

 

[JohnLynch]

Are you specific as to what method by which you are able to get the information you are looking for? I mean, would I absolutely have to have it all written out and detailed to give you to read, or would it be sufficient if I were to have you ask me questions you wanted to know the answers to and I provided answers that gave the information you wanted and remained consistent for later inquiries by way of me documenting my answers after the fact?

I am also one of those players and I'd be happy if you verbally told me the information. However I'd want to know the region we're starting in, what races are located there, what their place and culture is, their regional (and racial) history and what gods are worshiped by those who live in the starting region and what their creeds are and how their followers carry out their worship.