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

[EzekielRaiden]

Your first scenario does sound implausible, and if (B) is true and players here have encountered that (has anyone? genuinely asking), whew, red flag, that's a campaign bound for r/rpghorrorstories.

I have encountered both this and the other. Only once each personally, but there are individuals who have proudly laid claim to doing these exact things in discussions on this forum and others. It's part (but only part) of why I'm so leery of the "just trust me" response. I have personally seen it used very, very poorly. I ollied outy as soon as I realized what was going on. It's why I've said that there really, truly are some DMs who just enjoy preventing other people from having innocent fun, not because of any work done, but because they just dislike certain things and get a twisted glee out of telling others "you can't use that in MY sandbox" at the most (in)opportune time. If I had to speculate a reason, I'd peg it as a somewhat more "adult" version of the "no girls in the clubhouse" concept, forced into a far more subtle (or insidious) form because open hostility like that is too blatantly impolite. But, as stated, that's pure speculation.

Your second scenario is, I'll admit, entirely plausible. I agree: leading a player on, even for a moment, is a dick move and DMs shouldn't do it. But it's also (unfortunately) pretty much impossible to tell whether a DM who agrees to hear a player out has every intention of giving the player's idea due consideration or not. I'm not sure what else needs to be said about that.

Some people really will. I've definitely spoken (online) with multiple DMs who say things like "any homebrew, just ask" or "I'm open to suggestions," only to then present so many hurdles to actually getting any real homebrew or making alterations that they are effectively leading players on while perceiving themselves as fair and open-minded. Or consider the stuff Pming said earlier in the thread (before he was moderated), where he totally lets people play non-humans...and then openly engages in aggressively dehumanizing behavior until the "problem" (his word, not mine) goes away on its own. If that isn't an example of leading people on, I don't know what is; I'm not saying that all races should always be treated 100% identically by every NPC person ever, but having EVERYONE act like the non-human isn't there or can't understand ordinary speech? Not cool.

As for what more we can say? Talking about the kinds of ways you can meet people in the middle, assuming the player actually IS willing to meet in the middle and not simply nickel-and-dime you until they got everything they wanted exactly as they wanted it. (Because, to be clear, I have TOTALLY seen that behavior too!) My mentions of the "beyond the horizon" effect, for example, were intended as an olive branch of sorts, saying you don't have to harm the work you've done in order to find niches for a player's not-well-established desires. Or, earlier in the thread, my comments about really drilling down and finding out what players truly want, rather than just dismissing their requests with "no, that's not an option, pick something else."

We can discuss tools for both sides. I don't know as many tools distinctly for the more-restrictive approach, so I'd welcome hearing what kinds of things other DMs do or have done on that front. Though I tend to be very accommodating, I do (as I said earlier in the thread) sometimes "put my foot down." Ways to do that better than I do are never unwelcome. I am not so proud as to claim that I know all the best tricks and methods.

Beyond that though? I honestly don't really get the fundamentals of the "I put N hundred hours into this setting, you're not allowed to WARP it with you picks." Races are far less impactful than cultures in my experience, and cultures being narrowly linked to single species is a cliché I genuinely believe D&D needs to set aside. Not even for "social justice" reasons or the like, but because species monocultures are...well, NOT actually a lot of world-building work, and typically not very interesting as a result. Rather a small amount, really. Tolkien's elves and dwarves don't have monocultures, and there's nothing implicitly wrong with a human living among them and having strongly elvish or dwarvish culture as a result. (Heck, that's basically Aragorn, who wasn't far off being Elrond's adopted son.) And this isn't even touching on the "planet of hats" problem that monocultures of all stripes almost always fall into.

 

[Remathilis]

Chicago pizza looks more like a pie to me.

Would still try it though.

It's good, but I'm partial to Detroit style.

 

[Maxperson]

Hell, the abilities don’t require dancing.

My Bladesinger projects an arcane augmentation to his perceptions, causing him to see ritual circles and geometric designs that interplay and things move, allowing me to predict terrain and movements of objects and people, which is what gives him his AC, movement, and Acrobatics, buffs, while also helping sharpen his focus, giving him his concentration boost. Predicting people requires analyzing body language, and observed details about the people, in a Holmesian fashion.

As a side effect of training in this ability, he also has become better at analyzing a “room” and playing to it, giving him proficiency in performance.

I do wish I had enough skills to give him Insight, but investigate stands in a lot of the time.

I think that's a really cool idea for how to do a Bladesinger. I'd allow that in a heartbeat.

 

[Zardnaar]

It's good, but I'm partial to Detroit style.

What's detroit? I tried an "American" pizza here with an expat and he said it was decent but similar to California Pizza.

 

[Remathilis]

What's detroit? I tried an "American" pizza here with an expat and he said it was decent but similar to California Pizza.

Detroit-style pizza - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Buddy's is the best, but even Little Caesars version is good.

 

[prabe]

This explains it better than I could.

EDIT: Ninja'd by @Remathilis

 

[Zardnaar]

Detroit-style pizza - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Buddy's is the best, but even Little Caesars version is good.

Ah that's just a pizza slab here.

 

[Chaosmancer]

More of another strawman than a reductio ad absurdum, but still so unbelievable as to be beneath worthwhile discussion.

So unbeleivable, and yet people don't seem to clarify that they agree with our side about having discussions and being willing to compromise until we've dragged the conversation on for dozens of posts. With their initial posts... pretty much sounding like this. The boot problem players, players who question the DMs decisions are problem players, so why isn't this situation falling under that?

Simply because no one means it when they lay out those groundwork arguments, or because you can't imagine someone actually going through with it.

Both sides have implied that their way is better. This should surprise nobody.

Only posters on the pro-collaboration side in this argument have come right out and said that collaboration is objectively always better, and that DMs who don't collaborate are something "the hobby" has or ought to have "grown out of."

The poster who was talking about the hobby "growing out of" was, if memory serves me, speaking about the hobby growing out of solely being Tolkien.

Back in the early days, a Tolkien pastiche with a few elements from here and there was DnD to a lot of people.

Now, DnD is much bigger than that.



I would also hope the game could grow out of the model of "DM as King" but this idea of having ultimate authority seems to appeal to people to the point where they want to insist they have it in theory, even if they never exercise it in practice.

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

Whatever you believe I guess is law.

Players put in more work than the DM most of the time. That sounds right.

A clear expectation by the DM prior to character creation is ignored by the player and deemed a better expectation. That sounds right.

Most players can only follow one character creation because of their passion. That sounds right.

Addressing none of the points... sounds about how this thread keeps going.

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

I really just find it very difficult to understand someone who only has ONE character that they want to play. It just seems completely alien to me. For every character I do get to play there are dozens that I don't.

Maybe I have three. Maybe one is a Dragonborn Knight, the other is a Firbolg Druid and the last one is a Changeling Warlock.

And the DM rejects all three.

Maybe I do have a dozen ideas, but the first 10 are banned before I even get a chance to put them forth as options. So I'm on choice #11. Which, I'm not as excited about as choices 1 thru 10. I mean, how could I be, I'm not going to put the options I'm least excited to try out on the bottom of the list.

I mean, there has been claims that there are an infinite number of characters, hundreds of options per race, banning a single race cuts all of those options out. And most people here have been proposing banning the majority of races.

That is a lot of character concepts I could potentially have

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

Sure, but I could also have just erase the line about elves inventing it, and go. It doesn’t even need to have a specific racial origin.

Now, I like to know the history of such things and where they come from and what they look like, but not everyone cares, and that’s fine. If Max doesn’t care, he doesn’t need to do that work.

Sure, but there is a loss there. Things that existed, and now do not exist, and it lessens the structure that was there.

Just like you can simply erase Moradin from the Dwarven Pantheon, but if you don't replace him, things feel more shallow than they did before.

 

[Maxperson]

Really? No implications?

Yep.

Why are Elves the ones who invented Bladesinging in the RAW game? Because they are the ones who studied how to mix martial skill and magic. Look at their racial abilities. High Elves get both weapon training and basic magical study in their cantrip. Look at their stats, Bonus to intelligence for magic, but Dexterity is their physical stat.

What is the "elven style"? Graceful, flowing, Elves seek beauty in all that they do, which would apply to how they would seek to blend magic and fighting. It is a "Bladesong" for a reason, because it was designed to dance and song, it was designed to be beautiful as well as effective.

Now, I know, "But elves don't exist so that doesn't matter" except you are trying to transfer all of that over into your world. All of that is the lore and style of the Bladesinger Wizard.

Who cares. It could just as easily been any other race for reasons. Humans like to experiment with magic and weapons. Just look at War Wizards of Cormyr. Dwarves could be experimenting with magic and how to make it more warlike. Just because elves also have a reason doesn't mean that their some sort of sacred connection.

There are in inherent implications. You are inventing fluff that doesn't actually exist to support your position. I posted all that exists and it can be replaced with literally any other race.

And you transferred it to Tabaxi.

Immediately we run into style differences. Tabaxi are not known for their magic, or their martial skill. Maybe they are now, but what style of magic would they have? Well, Bladesinging is their art, so they'd be leaning towards that style. Interestingly, Tabaxi (as you know) they have Claws. Why would a Tabaxi Art of combining fighting and magic not take advantage of their natural weapons? And a style that relies on claws would be very different than one based on long, thin swords.

The style is irrelevant, though. They are a nimble race that would be well suited to both dancing and combining magic with their nimbleness and weaponry

The style would be more savage, faster, the positions of the body would be different. The Style would not likely have the restriction of one hand needing to be "free" because a Tabaxi would alter hands at will. A person adopting this style would favor dual-wielding more often, because it would more closely resemble the claws on each hand.

I just looked at Tabaxi and they have no racial ability to cast with both hands full, so they would in fact need hand free, just like the elves. Elves can also alter their hands at will, because D&D does not possess the concept of right and left handed.

 

[Maxperson]

So, to specifically look at the elf example that folks have been using, removing elves would be like a pizza place not having pepperoni.

This is a great analogy. When I'm ordering from Dominos or Papa John's, I know the setting and know that pepperoni(elf) is available. However, at least here in Los Angeles, there are a lot of boutique pizza places. The kind with goat cheese, bison sausage and the like. Many of those wouldn't be caught dead with something as basic as pepperoni on the menu. When I go into a new setting, I mean new pizza place, I don't assume that pepperoni(elf) is on the menu. Instead I ask I asked if I can have elves on my pizza, and if I get told no, I order a different tasty pizza and enjoy dinner. What I don't do, is ask why they don't have elves(pepperoni) on the menu. They don't, so I go with something else.

Edit: corrected a typo