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

[Zardnaar]

Presidents don't hunt terrorists on Air Force one in real life but they do in movies.

The only person stopping said astronaut from being demoted down to a wild weasel pilot is the GM who doesn't allow it. It's their world to build as they like.

As I said, we just have fundamental differences in the ideas behind character creation and the difference of what is possible, even in a full real world game.

I'm never going to be interested in a game that is just Real Life 2.0, I already live in that life and play RPGs to experience something new. I don't want hacking in an RPG to be running a script while my character eats a burrito and waits days for a result. I don't want my RPG cars unable to go 40mph over a speed bump or jumping a construction pile without trashing the suspension. I don't want my mercenary taken out of the fight because they had a flare up of a pinched nerve in his back as a result of spending the night on the couch because he had a fight with his wife about spending $800 on a new TV they didn't need.

Depends on how real the rpg is and it's premise.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Most of the time they are minor. Probably one in 20(or higher) are major. I would consider the addition or removal of a race to be relatively minor, though. Major to me is changing armor to be DR and hit points to be fatigue and physical body points.

A lot of people seem to feel that adding a race is a lot of work for the GM, it comes with a lot of assumptions and problems they need to world build around.

If adding is a big deal, subtracting should be a big deal. A value doesn't change its size because of what operation you are performing with it.

No, they don't. If I assumed that they were there, then I would not also think that they are probably there. There wouldn't be any doubt. That's what an assumption is. You are assuming that something is true. By expressing doubt, I am explicitly NOT assuming that they are there. I acknowledge that it is likely, but I'm not going to assume that it is true.

Ah, and here we see the classic Maxperson move.

I have never in my entire life speaking the English language heard anyone put forth the idea that to assume means to believe something is true with no doubt whatsoever, and that having doubt means you have not assumed something.

In fact, I usually see some say "Now, assuming that..." in situations where they know that their assumption is not accurate.


Now, I know that trying to convince you that words don't work that way, and you are speaking nonsense is a fool's errand. It always is. So, instead, I will pose this as a question.

What word do you use to describe someone taking a position or holding a belief, when they are uncertain of whether or not that position or belief is true or false, yet need to take a position anyways? They can't be assuming, according to you, because they have doubt. And since they have doubt, they also can't know. So, what is it they are doing. What verb do you use for that?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Said astronaut wouldn't be allowed to transfer to combat operations.

Oh oh! I can play this game.

Yes, they would.

Depends on how real the rpg is and it's premise.

I'm going to put Call of Cthulu somewhere between Action Movies like the Expendables and Horror Movies like Nightmare on Elm street.

As in... not very real.

 

[Hussar]

In my games I'm the producer of the world and the stage. I set events (typically multiple) in motion. From the moment the players enter that stage their PCs become part of that world. Those PCs are not under my control at all. From session 1 it's a collaborative world shaped by the players through the action of their PCs. Some of those actions happen off screen if the players want. I encourage and reward people writing up stories of what happens between adventures or to fill in details about their backstory. That can include (but it's rare that a player asks to do this) new NPCs or connections.

But I still run a very sandbox campaign. After the first intro session or two, the PCs are always free to go and do what they want. I basically have 2-3 directions they can take (various plot hooks) or they can go a completely different direction. After all, I do need some prep time to figure out what's going to happen next even if I do improvise a lot.

So I don't view it as completely one or the other. To be honest, I've never had a player that voiced a desire to do much in the way of world building.

Yeah, that dovetails nicely with what I was saying.

And, really, since people who share similar tastes tend to game together, it's not a surprise that you wouldn't have players that want to world build. It's simply not expected.

 

[Hussar]

That's when the first recorded representative made it to Europe from China . Marco wasn't the first to make it to China but left the best accounts.

See, there's the trick there isn't it? Recorded changes a LOT from year to year as new information is unearthed all the time. Never minding that there very well might be unrecorded examples.

 

[Hussar]

I agree with this...up to a point. Even if you view your players as consumers, don’t you want to provide them the best product for them possible? That implies a certain amount of flexibility in dealing with player requests.

Oh, of course. I would totally agree with that and I certainly did not mean any negative criticism of either approach. They are what they are.

If you go to a restaurant, you can usually specify some things about your meal. But, if you go to your local Italian restaurant and order a keema curry with naan, well, you're probably SOL.

 

[Hussar]

It happened so rarely irl it is an epic adventure in its own right.

So rare using it to justify a Samurai in Europe (pre 1600) is ridiculous.

Assuming the tine is vaguely Earth like campaign. A Samurai wanting to explore west is fine but not if the DM wants a different tonebeg campaign in Kara The or whatever.

It kind of like saying in a modern setting my background I landed on the moon.

This is flat out not true. Numerous Japanese traveled quite extensively after the Portuguese traders arrived in1500 (ish), bringing back Christian teachings for one thing.

 

[Zardnaar]

This is flat out not true. Numerous Japanese traveled quite extensively after the Portuguese traders arrived in1500 (ish), bringing back Christian teachings for one thing.

That's different timeframe. After age of exploration and trade links sure.

Even if it's possible still say no though. Eg siege of Vienna and someone wants a Samurai no.

Even then see previous comment about just because it exists doesn't mean you can play it.

 

[Hussar]

Not really. No. Players as consumers is just bad gming.

Choosing a suitable character for a campaign is collaboration. If we're a jazz band and you jam with us then there's going to be collaboration, but if you're basically a heavy metal guitarist then you're not going to fit in - we're not going to suddenly turn into a jazz/heavy metal fusion band just because you came along.

Not at all.

If you view gamers as consumers, as a DM you are going to want to produce the best product you can so that your consumers are happy. So, you create your world, create your campaign, and then the players play in it. The idea of creating the campaign or the world based on the characters the players bring (a la FATE systems) just isn't a consideration. The product is largely distinct from the players playing in it. The DM would run the same campaign whether it's this group of 5 players or that group of 5 players. And, since the players are happy, there's no problems.

Which mean, for the product model to work, you need to limit what the players can bring to the table. Again, everyone is happy, so, there's no negative meaning meant here.

The problem comes is when some of the group belong to the "gamers as consumers" side and others are "gamers as collaborators". It becomes a mismatch in expectations.

 

[Maxperson]

A lot of people seem to feel that adding a race is a lot of work for the GM, it comes with a lot of assumptions and problems they need to world build around.

If adding is a big deal, subtracting should be a big deal. A value doesn't change its size because of what operation you are performing with it.

A few things. First, people are different. What is a lot of work for one DM and a total world changer, isn't for another DM. Second, it's far easier to destroy/remove, than add/create. It takes hours to build a good card house, but 1 second and a slight bump of a pinky to bring it down. Third, how big a deal it is to add and/or remove is purely subjective. It might be a big deal to remove, but not add a race for one DM, a big deal to add, but not remove for a second DM, not a big deal for either for a third, and a big deal for both for a fourth. There is no "should" or "shouldn't" be a big deal.

Ah, and here we see the classic Maxperson move.

I have never in my entire life speaking the English language heard anyone put forth the idea that to assume means to believe something is true with no doubt whatsoever, and that having doubt means you have not assumed something.

In fact, I usually see some say "Now, assuming that..." in situations where they know that their assumption is not accurate.

Whatever. Nothing changes the fact that I wasn't assuming elves to be present.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Second, it's far easier to destroy/remove, than add/create. It takes hours to build a good card house, but 1 second and a slight bump of a pinky to bring it down.

Only if the analogy is sound: something that has no connections outside itself, other than the physical surface upon which it stands. I don't think that works for species or cultures in D&D. It's too interconnected at the local level, and there's too much background context at the gaming-culture (IRL) level.

If you're putting in a ton of work either way, you're putting in a ton of work whether or not a specific race is present. Choosing to build a world that lacks elves is going to imply some extra work on your part, for example, because so much of the fiction and (IRL) culture surrounding D&D includes things like elves and halflings--you have to do more work yourself, as it were.

Cultures generally aren't self-contained, but rather constrained by available transportation and the like. Hence why I've (repeatedly) referenced the whole "beyond the horizon is your friend" thing. In a medieval world, even places that are physically connected (the way, say, China is physically connected to the Iberian Peninsula) can still be sufficiently "separated" that they are curious unknowns from which many strange and wondrous things could arise without, strictly speaking, being a Problem per se. Couple that with the possibility of actually developed cultures living beyond an ocean or other much-more-difficult barrier to travel, and you get a ripe opportunity for introducing things that don't need tons of foreknown and pre-established context, but can still be received with curiosity, wonder, or greed rather than hate and fear.

E.g. maybe there's a (relatively) advanced dragonborn nation on the opposite side of the Nebow* Ocean, and now it wants to make trade overtures; that could be a great reason for a diplomatic envoy character, who is making those initial overtures of peace and trying to assuage concerns. Or if you have any kind of other worlds, they could come from one of those, and for them this strange world populated by humans might be as Weird and Magical as the Feywild is to humans. Which could be an incredibly cool story!

Again, you aren't required to do any of these things, but keeping an open mind makes so many interesting paths available to you and your group. That's all. And keeping an open mind does not mean needing to suddenly do a ton of extra work yourself. Working with your players, intentionally leaving things lightly-sketched and allowing spontaneous ideas to fill in the blanks, or stealing ideas from the players as they speculate, all great ways to lighten your burdens while still producing quality work. Or maybe you just take it a week at a time; the players can't learn every single detail about a new culture in a single session. Etc.

*Nearby Enormous Body Of Water, naturally