Are your players usually ok with restrictions?

[Water Bob]

I wouldn't necessarily be against having these restrictions because it seems like you've made them to elicit a specific type of game.

The only time I make restrictions is for story reasons. If I'm running a typical game, I'll have no restrictions, except maybe to say, "Everybody starts out at level 1," or, "We're just using these supplements in this game."

Sometimes (as always, if it's story related), I'll have the PCs all come from the same place. And, sometimes setting comes with its own restrictions. For example, if I said all the characters will start out as citizens of Waterdeep, then characters like Rangers and Half-Orcs will probably have a hard time fitting into that situation--but that leaves a wide variety of other choices.

It all comes down to the story, restrictions or no.

Although if I was interested in playing a specific race or class that I thought would fit well into the guild I would ask if an exception could be made. For example if the guild is teeming with half-orcs and humans, I might ask to break the restrictions and play an orc. Or perhaps a wizard who specializes in the subtle spells that a thieves guild would love to have at their disposal (scrying, sleep, invisibility, etc.).

And, if it supported the story, as I think both of these ideas would, I'd certainly allow it.

I doubt this would make me quit a game but I really dislike this. Names are very subjective and getting a name that I disliked would be a constant blemish on the character. I'd feel like, "You can't throw me a bone here and rewrite all of the prophesies about Frodo to be prophesies about Bilbo?" I guess this restriction has an obstinate, my way or the highway feel to it that I don't care for.

The first time I've done the name thing is in my current Conan game. I guess I've trained my players well, because nobody had a problem with it.

In the culture I've developed, there are seven stones (not unlike ancient stones found in Britian), all set in a circle, near the PC's village. It is said that, when Crom gave the secret of steel to man, the high god at the time, Dagda, sent seven titans to punish Crom. But Crom defeated them in battle. He so respected their effort, though, that he buried them instead of leaving them on the battlefield to rot. Present day, the seven stones are said to be the radial headstones for the buried titans. Crom honored his well-fought enemy, and thus, the Cimmerians respect the titans' skill to this day.

It is normal for the names of the titans to become the family name in Cimmerian society, and the family name is really not that important (because clan is more important than family). Conan never uses his family name.

It is a rare occurence, though, when the first name of a person is taken from a titan. When this is done, it usually denotes something special about the person.

Thus, I decreed in this game that the PCs must take the names of the titans in order to be seen as a cut above the others. (Of course, it's up to the players to ensure that the characters live up to that calling.)

That's why I did the name thing this time out.

If a player can't live with that and would decline from being in my game because of it, I probably don't want that player in my game to begin with.

I said I haven't had a problem with restrictions from my players, but I think if any of us were faced with this, we'd probably balk. We'd be sure to undermine anything about the names by renaming ourselves and using those names instead of the ones given. Frankly, I'd probably say "Just give us a pre-gen already and we'll play your scenario, then we'll get back to our own characters."

You would still have lots of room to develop your own character given the guidelines. You're just restricted by race and class given the scenario.

The number of limitations, the ties in with prophecy, part of an organization capable of ordering us around, they all are setting off my railroad campaign vibe. If I'm under such tight restrictions at the beginning, I rather expect further restrictions to come.

See what I wrote about this above.

 

[amethal]

I suppose it all comes down to trust. Water Bob has explained the reasons behind his restrictions, and it sounds like a cool campaign. As a result, I'd be happy to accept any and all of his restrictions in future campaigns, without needing to be given a reason.

As a DM, I'd explain the campaign I was thinking of running, and the restrictions, and see if the players were happy with them. If one of them wasn't, I'd run something else - I've got tons of campaigns I'd like to run "some day", so if any one campaign concept gets rejected I'll suggest another one.

My players are also my friends, and I'm not interested in excluding one of them, or putting pressure on them to play something they don't want to play.

 

[Water Bob]

My players are also my friends, and I'm not interested in excluding one of them, or putting pressure on them to play something they don't want to play.

And maybe I'm lucky in that my players typically soak up anything I throw at them.

If I said, "Hey, let's start a campaign of all dwarves, with a mountain fortress as your home, and the goblin hordes encroaching on your territory," they'd all roll up some dwarves.

 

[amethal]

If I said, "Hey, let's start a campaign of all dwarves, with a mountain fortress as your home, and the goblin hordes encroaching on your territory," they'd all roll up some dwarves.

Whereas for our current Pathfinder campaign, pretty much any race was acceptable, and we ended up with ... 3 dwarves and a half-orc (and the half-orc is only because the player wanted to play a character with darkvision and +2 racial bonus to Cha).

 

[Water Bob]

Whereas for our current Pathfinder campaign, pretty much any race was acceptable, and we ended up with ... 3 dwarves and a half-orc (and the half-orc is only because the player wanted to play a character with darkvision and +2 racial bonus to Cha).

This brings up the reverse situation--where restrictions are some times needed. Let's say you do have a character that wants to play a half-orc and one that wants to play a dwarf.

How, in the world, would these two people ever adventure together? What about racial hatred? Yet, the GM is faced with coming up with a very thin story to cover why an Orc (becuase dwarves look at anything-orc as full orcs) and a dwarf would travel together, much less trust each others' backs in battle.

Or, the GM has to tell one or the other that he's got to change is character type.





If you open up the game, willy-nilly, and end up with, say, a party of cut throats and thieves plus a good aligned Cleric, you've got a believeability issue there. Why would a good Cleric travel with band of marauders and bandtis?

 

[gamerprinter]

I see PCs as individuals who may not conform to the racial norm - PCs are always the exceptions. Racial hatred is a racial thing, not necessarily an individual concept. I think racial hatred can play a role in adventure party dynamics, but not so much as to disrupt play. There would always be some backstory to present why a dwarf and a half-orc are in the same party, and how they get along in general should be a concern.

When problematic racial PCs encounter the typical NPC on the other hand, no doubt racial hatred will become an issue, as it probably should. That's just a part of the game... and makes good role play opportunities.

 

[Water Bob]

I see PCs as individuals who may not conform to the racial norm - PCs are always the exceptions. Racial hatred is a racial thing, not necessarily an individual concept. I think racial hatred can play a role in adventure party dynamics, but not so much as to disrupt play. There would always be some backstory to present why a dwarf and a half-orc are in the same party, and how they get along in general should be a concern.

When problematic racial PCs encounter the typical NPC on the other hand, no doubt racial hatred will become an issue, as it probably should. That's just a part of the game... and makes good role play opportunities.

Well, you can always handwave a story as to why characters that shouldn't be together are together. The good cleric is trying to reform the evil party. The half-orc was outcase, left to die, by its parents and raised among the dwarves, etc.

But, in general, I think a party's cohesion should make sense.

Why is the Paladin of Tyr, the god of justice, working with a thief, who is a devote follower of Mask?

Well...um...the king threw these two unlikelies together for a special mission...





EDIT: I think that would be an interesting game--to put together a PC party where all characters worshipped the same god.

 

[saskganesh]

It's like the Dirty Dozen, Kelly's Heroes or the Odd Couple. Odd group compositions can work out well with a bit of thought. While it is expected there will be some room for tension, there is equally room for comedy.

The main thing is that the group be sustainable, and maybe a few stiff combats and shared dangers are all that is needed to make them firm comrades in arms, whether its cleric and cuthroats, or three dwarves and a half orc man.

Back to OP: I have some restrictions. No elves (for setting/plot reasons) and I discourage hobbits (they bore me). I'm good with requests but I have never had something super wacky requetsed of me.

 

[gamerprinter]

Why is the Paladin of Tyr, the god of justice, working with a thief, who is a devote follower of Mask?

Well...um...the king threw these two unlikelies together for a special mission...

EDIT: I think that would be an interesting game--to put together a PC party where all characters worshipped the same god.

When I create a setting, I also create the deities and cosmology, so I'm just as likely to create a god of justice, that may approve of using clandestine means to achieve justice in environments where controlling elements are harbingers of injustice. I wouldn't include Tyr, but some deity who would approve of missions combining paladins and rogues.

I too have run campaigns where all the party members served as an ecclesiastic militant order including paladins, clerics, magus, fighters, even rogues from a church fighting order, or heresy hunters. Where the opposing forces are heretics or defilers of the church.

There all kinds of campaign concepts. However, I never use somebody else's setting, so I'm never restricted by what the developers provide. If I need counterintuitive party dynamics and racial mixes - I provide the opportunity in my world/cultural design.

 

[Sunseeker]

As long as I tell them in advance, I haven't had any problems yet....BUT...my restrictions are usually pretty light.