D&D 5E What is the appeal of the weird fantasy races?

[Minigiant]

So is this even actually a real problem in real life or is this just one of these internet things? How many of you have had your must-have character idea denied by the GM? How many of you have had players insist to make characters totally incompatible with the pitch? Because I can't really recall either of those having happened to me in real life... There may have been some discussions about could this or that work, but I really cannot remember any actual serious disagreements. I mean I have played for decades, so it is possible that something like that has happened at some point and I've just forgotten, but in my experience this doesn't really seem like a common problem.

I think the problem is a bit exaggerated. However there are some really bad players and DMs out there.

But really I think the real drive of the discussion is: Really Narrow Settings.

I've seen some really narrow setting write-ups and race/class restriction in books, games, and forums that limit PC options so hard that you are just begging from the bumping of heads at Session 0 or players insisting on roleplaying the craziest characters as their creative juices were stifled on on the character sheet.

That's why I'd almost never run a human only campaign again. All the PCs are bores or loons with nothing in between.

 

[D1Tremere]

It's not a matter of percentages, but it since you insist...

I will lose 100% of my fun if I have to run a game where there are rubber forehead aliens.

The player will lose 100% of their fun if they can't play a rubber forehead alien.

What is the solution? I don't want to lose 100% of my fun, cause it's my fun.

For a person that claims to be smart, you sure can't seem to understand a very simple concept!

Again, what is your solution for me not wanting to lose 100% of my fun?

I think he is confused (and I could be wrong) because for some of us it is difficult to understand how a person's enjoyment of running a game for others could be so heavily tied to player's race choices. As a DM it changes very little for me to run a game with 4 humans or 4 whatevers, but as a player their favorite race being excluded just because can make a lot of difference to their fun. You are obviously entitled to feel the way you feel and run the way you run, it is just very hard for me to understand the perspective.

 

[Maxperson]

I said no a lot to my friends back in 2E. Complete Book of Humanoids, Drow if the Underdark etc.

Sometimes I said yes just depended on the situation.

Normally used settings for weird stuff eg Darksun.

I say no to my current group and the youngest at 30 has been playing in it for 13 years. His dad and I have been playing since 1984. Take Drow. They are a very disruptive race to a lot of campaigns, but not every campaign. Usually when they ask I say no, but sometimes I say yes. It all depends.

 

[Maxperson]

I think he is confused (and I could be wrong) because for some of us it is difficult to understand how a person's enjoyment of running a game for others could be so heavily tied to player's race choices. As a DM it changes very little for me to run a game with 4 humans or 4 whatevers, but as a player their favorite race being excluded just because can make a lot of difference to their fun. You are obviously entitled to feel the way you feel and run the way you run, it is just very hard for me to understand the perspective.

I absolutely loathe dragonborn, so I've gotten rid of them as a race. Were one in my game, a large chunk of my enjoyment would go away since that PC would grate on me every time it interacted with the world. Race isn't somethin you can forget.

I don't like Gnomes, Tabaxi, Tieflings, Halflings, and some others, but I wouldn't say no to those races, because they don't grate on me like Dragonborn.

 

[Zardnaar]

I say no to my current group and the youngest at 30 has been playing in it for 13 years. His dad and I have been playing since 1984. Take Drow. They are a very disruptive race to a lot of campaigns, but not every campaign. Usually when they ask I say no, but sometimes I say yes. It all depends.

I'll take Drow over Kender.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I have no problem if you and your table want a kitchen sink campaign instead of a curated one. It's your choice. On the other hand, D&D has 1 critical role that must be filled: the DM. If the DM ain't happy, ain't nobody happy.

Could playing the bright, new and shiny (to 5E which is all that matters) race make a single player ever so slightly happier? Maybe. Maybe it's just the D&D version of attention deficit disorder. The DM has to think of the enjoyment of everyone at the table, not any one individual.

People have always wanted to play weird-ass characters. I used to allow anything. I think the straw the broke the camel's back for me was the guy that wanted to play a half dragon half vampire. With a cloak that always fluttered in a nonexistent wind (he was very specific about that).

I have my preferences, you have yours. If that means I'm not the right DM for you because I want my races to have depth, culture and a place in the history of the campaign world world I maintain then so be it.

First and foremost, the DM has to be happy with the campaign because if they are not, sooner or later they will burn out and stop DMing.

It would be a lot easier to think you were willing to be reasonable about live and let live, if every single post of yours didn't always have some dismissive turn of phrase towards those of us who like something else.

Now we have "the D&D version of attention deficit disorder" for wanting to play a race introduced to the game 40 years ago? Oh, sorry, new to 5e... Four and a half years ago. Meanwhile you are all old-school and solid with your... six and a half year old game?

I can see how you are much more grounded in tradition with your whol two years.... except didn't dragonborn come out in the player's Handbook? Darn it. That means our preferences are just as old as yours... unless we go to looking outside of 5e... which means we are back to races like Tabaxi being 40 years old.

Hmm... well how are we supposed to have attention deficit disorder for liking something that old? Oh well, I'm sure you'll find a new way to insult us for liking things you don't like.

 

[Oofta]

Doesn't matter. If you aren't able to compromise with someone, you shouldn't be in a social situation with them.

If you're entering a social situation, and refusing to compromise just because they "aren't your friend", then you're in the wrong.

Why is it that your version of compromise always means the DM has to allow anything the player wants? That the DM never has any say in the matter?

 

[Zardnaar]

It would be a lot easier to think you were willing to be reasonable about live and let live, if every single post of yours didn't always have some dismissive turn of phrase towards those of us who like something else.

Now we have "the D&D version of attention deficit disorder" for wanting to play a race introduced to the game 40 years ago? Oh, sorry, new to 5e... Four and a half years ago. Meanwhile you are all old-school and solid with your... six and a half year old game?

I can see how you are much more grounded in tradition with your whol two years.... except didn't dragonborn come out in the player's Handbook? Darn it. That means our preferences are just as old as yours... unless we go to looking outside of 5e... which means we are back to races like Tabaxi being 40 years old.

Hmm... well how are we supposed to have attention deficit disorder for liking something that old? Oh well, I'm sure you'll find a new way to insult us for liking things you don't like.

Doesn't matter if it exists or not doesn't mean you get to play it.

 

[Minigiant]

I think he is confused (and I could be wrong) because for some of us it is difficult to understand how a person's enjoyment of running a game for others could be so heavily tied to player's race choices. As a DM it changes very little for me to run a game with 4 humans or 4 whatevers, but as a player their favorite race being excluded just because can make a lot of difference to their fun. You are obviously entitled to feel the way you feel and run the way you run, it is just very hard for me to understand the perspective.

I think it's less "not being able to play their favorite race" and "not being able to play their favorite races".

For example, my cousin only play one kind of PC.

"stab-happy, high Dex, member of discriminated race that people are forced to respect because he gets results."

He likes NPCs hating him but forced to swallow their worlds.
Drow, orcs, goblins, tieflings, a walking skeleton.

So if you ban all those he's not playing. Straight up.

 

[Oofta]

So is this even actually a real problem in real life or is this just one of these internet things? How many of you have had your must-have character idea denied by the GM? How many of you have had players insist to make characters totally incompatible with the pitch? Because I can't really recall either of those having happened to me in real life... There may have been some discussions about could this or that work, but I really cannot remember any actual serious disagreements. I mean I have played for decades, so it is possible that something like that has happened at some point and I've just forgotten, but in my experience this doesn't really seem like a common problem.

It's happened to me a couple of times, people that wanted to play drow.

I said no, they came up with different characters and still, amazingly, had fun.