D&D 5E As a Player, why do you play in games you haven't bought into?

[MGibster]

Slavery might exist and "make sense" in a historic or fictional setting . . . but it can still be a triggering topic for some folks and is something you have to be careful with. Eyebrows can and perhaps should be raised. Even with slavery depicted as evil and slavers as antagonists.

This is where I get confused when people bring up triggering. When you say triggering do you mean it's just a topic the player finds unpleasant or do you mean it might make the player recall some unpleasant psychological trauma?

I wouldn't be comfortable playing in a game where slavery is just part of the landscape, and my background could be randomly a "slaver" or a "slave".

And there's nothing wrong with that.

With the right group of friends, I wouldn't mind playing in a campaign where the antagonists are slavers . . . but again, it's dangerous territory that needs to be tread carefully. I might even be willing to play a repentant ex-slaver, or escaped ex-slave. But if anyone in my group threw down the x-card on that sort of thing, then it's got to be removed from the game.

It wouldn't even occur to me that I would need to warn players at a convention if I were running a scenario involving the PCs defeating a group of slavers.

 

[Chaosmancer]

it's fine concept for a PC. And not relevant to this situation.

Faith in the gods being real, and faith in them being just, are hardly the same thing when you have concrete evidence for the first.

Splitting hairs.

Maybe they believe the Gods are dead. Maybe they believe the Gods were usurped by Demons. Maybe they believe they left.

And the "concrete evidence" can be really flimsy in a setting like FR, where magic is so incredibly powerful. A case in point, I do believe a plot point of the setting is that the Mind Flayer have fairly often tried to enact a ritual to blot out the sun. We do know that the Elves enacted a ritual to tear apart a continent.

Compared to that things like "Guy showed up turned everyone in the city into skeletons" doesn't exactly scream "power beyond mortal understanding"

You'd still have the issue eluded to earlier. There's a strong possibility that no PCs would be a knight. That's something of an issue in itself.

These kind of things can get out of control - you may be willing to allow an exception in principle, but you can quickly find that everyone is an exception, in which case you may legitimately be asking yourself why these players signed up for a game about knights if none of them wanted to be a knight.

Because they wanted to explore Camelot and you said "Knights of the Round"?

Because they want to partake in the greatest quest the knights ever undertook and search for the Holy Grail?

Because they want to participate in court intrigue to prevent the gleaming kingdom from falling to ruin from within?

I mean, all of this fits into a "Knights of the Round Table" game, without needing to wear heavy armor and carry a lance.

 

[MGibster]

I mean, all of this fits into a "Knights of the Round Table" game, without needing to wear heavy armor and carry a lance.

I mean, except for the knights part, yeah, it fits in perfectly well.

 

[Lanefan]

Another might be how one would (or whether one could) explain their planned story arc to someone that doesn't play the game. What kind of story is it?

The problem with explaining the planned story arc up front is that you've also just spoilered the whole campaign.

 

[ph0rk]

The problem with explaining the planned story arc up front is that you've also just spoilered the whole campaign.

My point is, if one can’t figure out that intellectual exercise, they probably don’t have as clear an arc as they think they do.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I mean, except for the knights part, yeah, it fits in perfectly well.

David Bowie and Mick Jagger were/are Knights, as in they have been knighted. So, who says none of the characters are knights just because none of them are fighters or Paladins?

 

[Don Durito]

What do you mean my asthmatic octagenarian isn't an appropriate character for this campaign. You said knights and he's a knight!

 

[MGibster]

David Bowie and Mick Jagger were/are Knights, as in they have been knighted. So, who says none of the characters are knights just because none of them are fighters or Paladins?

I remember a few years back there was a Saturday Night Live sketch whose premise was that a dragon was attacking Great Britain and the only knights they could find were the likes of Mick Jagger, Patrick Stewart, and Richard Branson. As to who says none of the characters are knights just because none of them are fighters or paladins in a Knights of the Round Table game? I suppose anyone who knew what a Knight of the Round Table actually was. But I think D&D would be a horrible choice for such a campaign.

 

[Dire Bare]

David Bowie and Mick Jagger were/are Knights, as in they have been knighted. So, who says none of the characters are knights just because none of them are fighters or Paladins?

While I do think that knight characters can be represented by different character classes than fighter and paladin, medieval knighthood did mean something different than modern knighthood does. And you know that!

But, without being a historian (professional or amateur), it wouldn't surprise me if there were non-warrior medieval knights! And, I can totally see a campaign where the more modern use of the honor is used, knighting artists and leaders in addition to great warriors. Or even a more corrupt system where knighthood and nobility can be purchased . . . which I know has happened historically. D&D at large has already certainly expanded what a knight is, I'm thinking of the Warlock Knights of the Realms, or the Hell Knights of Pathfinder. In a Knights of the Round Table D&D campaign . . . how D&D is it? How historical is it? How mythological is it? Is the game set in ancient Britain, the nation of Cormyr (Forgotten Realms), or some other Arthurian-inspired fantasy realm? Two campaigns based on the same general theme could end up looking very different!

But, I'm now totally psyched for an Arthurian-style campaign where I'm going to play a bardic knight based on Mick Jagger! Using comedian John Mulaney's Mick Jagger impression! "Yes!" "No!" "Not funny!"

 

[Crimson Longinus]

David Bowie and Mick Jagger were/are Knights, as in they have been knighted. So, who says none of the characters are knights just because none of them are fighters or Paladins?

Bowie wasn't a knight; he was offered it, but declined.