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

[Lanefan]

Why are they handing you a character after session 0?

Because what some are referring to as session 0 - the campaign pitch, player invites, etc. - is actually session -1 and doesn't even have to happen as a group: the DM can always talk to prospective players individually. Session 0 is roll-up night, which if things go efficiently can roll right into session 1 of play.

 

[Hussar]

What's wrong with that? The game world is full of people who make boats go. But, the same skills that characters use to explore the wilderness when it is a forest or a desert apply when the wilderness is an ocean.

As much creative control over character class and background as you seem to demand, perhaps you should just make the characters yourself - though I suspect you'll then be irritated the players aren't playing them right.

Oh, please. Asking that at least one PC has a tie to the town the characters are based in, and one character be able to sail is too much? Wow.

However, the DM could have quite simply told them all that someone needed one of these backgrounds from the beginning, instead of saving it like some sort of trump card for later. "Aha, you made characters before session zero, but now they are all wrong because (reason not shared until right now)."

Good grief. So, it's okay to tell players to CHANGE their characters after they've made them, but, not okay to tell them to include a couple of minor bits beforehand?

How could I share chargen details before Session 0 where it was explicitly stated that that's where chargen details would be shared? But, this is my fault?

Wow.

 

[GSHamster]

Regarding the Ghosts of Saltmarsh, example, the DM could have said that all characters get free proficiency in sailing because boats will be so important. There was no need to force characters to spend resources on a proficiency they may not want.

 

[Don Durito]

Regarding the Ghosts of Saltmarsh, example, the DM could have said that all characters get free proficiency in sailing because boats will be so important. There was no need to force characters to spend resources on a proficiency they may not want.

The trick here is to say "You can have proficiency in sailing for free, but you must have some explanation for how you learnt it". It's amazing how easily players can adapt their character concept when they're getting something for free.

 

[Hussar]

/snip
See how many questions come from just that one sentence. People are saying that just a one sentence campaign pitch may not be good enough to convey the information you think is important. It is important for players and DMs to have a conversation about what is expected in the world.

Fortunately, not a single person in this thread has said that a one sentence pitch is good enough to convey the information.

Since we're talking about gross mischaracterizations after all.

 

[Hussar]

Sure, but thats, what, three different groups he's walked away from because of character generation "issues"?

/snip

Wait, what? where did that come from? This is the first group I've walked away from in a very long time. And the first time it was ever because of character generation issues. Where are you getting this?

 

[Hussar]

He's not being completely truthful, though. He discussed with his players that the game was going to carry a nautical theme, and that's it. His players discussed with him and each other their character concepts. He approved of those character concepts. The session zero was a discussion of the characters and how they connected.

I was running an Illusionist who was also a Charlatan. My concept was that I would use my skills to con people out of their money, and took the quests being given as a way to add credibility to my character. Who wouldn't want to buy from the great hero? As in his previous campaign I played in, he did nothing with this concept. I only made it about 3 sessions in before I dropped out of the game.

If he discussed with his players that one of them should require a sailing background of some type, then he did so after I left the game.

Edit: to add emphasis.

Yeah, I did approve the character concepts because, well, what else am I supposed to do when every player ignores explicit instructions (don't make a character before the session) and comes to the table with a character they just HAVE to play?

And, yes, I didn't quite have a chance to do anything with the concept that came completely out of left field, had nothing to do with the campaign, and only had about, as you said, three sessions to work with. Yup, totally on me. And, let's be honest @Raunalyn, you dropping the game had nothing to do with me and everything to do with real life stepping in the way, considering you dropped your own campaign as well, or more or less had since you would cancel more than half the time without warning.

Since we're being honest and all.

 

[Hussar]

I want to take a second to go back to that Ghosts of Saltmarsh example.

If memory serves me, Hussar said that the entire group came back and only one of them had proficiency in sailing. With just that information... did the players ignore the premise of the adventure?

I frankly know nothing about the Ghosts of Saltmarsh. But, seeing as we do have that sailing is important, I'm going to go through some thought processes.

Sailing is a big part of this adventure.
Someone is going to want to captain the ship.
I don't want to be part of that discussion where five of us want to be the captain.
I'll make a different crew member.

By this alone, I've eliminated taking the Sailor background and getting "Water Vehicles"

Maybe I want to play the ship's cook, and take "Guild Artisan"
Maybe I want to play into the British Privateer archetype and feel like Soldier represents my service to the country.
Maybe I want to be a cabinboy/girl who snuck unto the boat at a young age and take Urchin.
Maybe I want to be the devotee to the Sea Goddess or the Storm God, praying they don't sink our ship, and take Acolyte.
Maybe I want to play a sailor, but instead of going for the practical side of sailor, I go entertainer bard and have a woman or man at every port of call. I'm a known entertainer at dockside taverns or inns.


And see, all of these people would make perfect sense to find on a ship. Some of them are vital, some of them will be entertaining, some are tropes, and none of them steer the ship. You do not need, nor do you likely want more than two people capable of steering the ship with proficiency. And, that is also important, I don't need proficiency, maybe I can direct a ship, I just suck at it because it isn't my main job.

I'd bet a hundred bucks that most of the staff on a ship were not and to this day are not capable navigators or captains.


And this is the only point I want to keep making. Just because players did not come with what you expected, that does not mean they are trying to sabotage your game.

And, frankly, if that's what had happened, I'd be shutting up right now. If the five characters had ANYTHING tying them to a ship in any way, shape or form, then I'd be a happy person. But, as @Raunalyn has pointed out, his character is a perfect example of what I was given to work with. An illusionist charlatan. Nothing nautical about the character at all. Nothing tying him to the town at all. And, a character that was created whole cloth BEFORE our session 0 despite knowing (and I know he knew because I have the forum posts) that I had specifically asked that characters be created as a group.

I 100% agree with you @Chaosmancer. There are far more duties aboard a ship than simply steering. Not everyone needed a sailor background - the one with nautical experience wound up with a smuggler background. Having tool proficiency in wood working or something similar could make you the bosun. Cook. There are a thousand different things you could be.

But, guess what? Not a single one of those perfectly understandable and reasonable options were even considered. Every character came from far away with no family and no ties to the setting. One character had a naval background after what I remember as a lenghty discussion to finally get SOMEONE to take it.

No, I was most definitely the wrong DM for this group. Absolutely. They wanted things out of the game that I was not interested in at all and I was a terrible fit with those players. I should have walked earlier, but, honestly, the previous campaigns were very good and the some of the other players, who had dropped out of the game, made it a ton of fun. It just, rather unfortunately, ran aground on the shoals of everyone having seriously different expectations of what they wanted out of the game.

 

[Zardnaar]

And, frankly, if that's what had happened, I'd be shutting up right now. If the five characters had ANYTHING tying them to a ship in any way, shape or form, then I'd be a happy person. But, as @Raunalyn has pointed out, his character is a perfect example of what I was given to work with. An illusionist charlatan. Nothing nautical about the character at all. Nothing tying him to the town at all. And, a character that was created whole cloth BEFORE our session 0 despite knowing (and I know he knew because I have the forum posts) that I had specifically asked that characters be created as a group.

I 100% agree with you @Chaosmancer. There are far more duties aboard a ship than simply steering. Not everyone needed a sailor background - the one with nautical experience wound up with a smuggler background. Having tool proficiency in wood working or something similar could make you the bosun. Cook. There are a thousand different things you could be.

But, guess what? Not a single one of those perfectly understandable and reasonable options were even considered. Every character came from far away with no family and no ties to the setting. One character had a naval background after what I remember as a lenghty discussion to finally get SOMEONE to take it.

No, I was most definitely the wrong DM for this group. Absolutely. They wanted things out of the game that I was not interested in at all and I was a terrible fit with those players. I should have walked earlier, but, honestly, the previous campaigns were very good and the some of the other players, who had dropped out of the game, made it a ton of fun. It just, rather unfortunately, ran aground on the shoals of everyone having seriously different expectations of what they wanted out of the game.

It happens. I would play whatever's missing, ask about 3pp ocean domain or play a coastal land druid.

Or some sort of sailor/pirate. Maybe storm sorcerer.

If I can't get an appropriate subclass eg I really want a paladin pick a decent background. Be a sailor or something.

 

[Dire Bare]

Fortunately, not a single person in this thread has said that a one sentence pitch is good enough to convey the information.

Since we're talking about gross mischaracterizations after all.

Yeah, sorry.

I disagree with you on a lot of things, but this thread has turned into a dump on Hussar thread with a lot of mischaracterization of what you've posted. I'm not sure it's worth continuing.