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

[Oofta]

What would be cool is if Oofta asks the potential new guy why they want to be a good Drow ranger and find a background and concept that does work in Oofta's world. Perhaps the rebellious race works better as an orc cleric here?

Not saying Oofta doesn't do this already.

Not that DMs should be forced to do it.

But to me this should start becoming the norm.

I dunno about other peeps but I like when people find a place in my world that hits their interests.

So let's say someone wants to play a drow ranger. I mean, I get it, everyone wants to be another Drizzle Drizzt. Unfortunately as much as I enjoyed The Chrystal Shard back in the day drow are the bogeyman and my world is, in a word, harsh. They aren't even native to Midgard, they do raiding parties from Svartlheim and then retreat. You'd likely be attacked on sight on a regular basis. Even if I gave you some kind of disguise, no disguise is perfect and I don't want to deal with the repercussions when you are inevitably discovered. That and the sunlight sensitivity is going to be a really harsh penalty in my games because a significant percentage of encounters are going to be outside during the day. No, I'm not going to give you all the benefits of the race and then hand-wave the penalty.

So I would ask why. Is it to have a dark past? On the run from powerful enemies? Overcome adversity? Let's work on a back story and an air of mystery or impending doom. What kind of cool story can we come up with? Some kind of tattoo that other elves (and the occasional non-elf) will mark you as an outcast? Are you [insert accepted race] but were captured by the drow and only recently escaped? Perhaps even believed you were a drow? How does that work?

This has come up a couple of times, we always worked it out.

 

[Maxperson]

But other players are not.

Sure they are.

 

[billd91]

But other players are not.

Who said that?
If the player doesn't like dragonborn, they don't have to play one. They don't have to like one in character. They might ask the other players to not bring one to the table, but that's up to the other players to agree to or not.
If the only thing the player likes or wants to play is something the GM does NOT, then you've got an impasse. And if the GM mentions that in their pitch or in session 0, you know to not sign up for or continue that game...

 

[Jaeger]

What would be cool is if Oofta asks the potential new guy why they want to be a good Drow ranger and find a background and concept that does work in Oofta's world. ...

While it might be cool, certainly we can both agree that Oofta would be under no obligation to do so, as he had already laid out his restrictions in good faith.

What if I was dead set on my 100% original Drow ranger concept? Because in my mind such a concept would just be sooooooo perfect to play in Oofta's world!

He already has four players ready to go who created PC's conforming to his campaign conceits.

Surely Oofta should not have to do anything but say: "It seems like my DM style isn't for you Bro; peace out, and good luck!"

Because we both agree that no GM should be forced right?

 

[Zardnaar]

While it might be cool, certainly we can both agree that Oofta would be under no obligation to do so, as he had already laid out his restrictions in good faith.

What if I was dead set on my 100% original Drow ranger concept? Because in my mind such a concept would just be sooooooo perfect to play in Oofta's world!

He already has four players ready to go who created PC's conforming to his campaign conceits.

Surely Oofta should not have to do anything but say: "It seems like my DM style isn't for you Bro; peace out, and good luck!"

Because we both agree that no GM should be forced right?

Drow ranger and Kender anything are no goes for the sake of the multiverse.

 

[Maxperson]

Who said that?
If the player doesn't like dragonborn, they don't have to play one. They don't have to like one in character. They might ask the other players to not bring one to the table, but that's up to the other players to agree to or not.
If the only thing the player likes or wants to play is something the GM does NOT, then you've got an impasse. And if the GM mentions that in their pitch or in session 0, you know to not sign up for or continue that game...

Actually, it's only when the player will ONLY play something that the DM does not like that there is an impasse. Otherwise, the player has other fun options and is being a jerk if he insists on playing it. Should there be such an impasse, and I've never seen one, the player is the one that needs to leave the game. The DM and all of the other players who are all on the same page take precedence over a single player.

 

[Minigiant]

While it might be cool, certainly we can both agree that Oofta would be under no obligation to do so, as he had already laid out his restrictions in good faith.

What if I was dead set on my 100% original Drow ranger concept? Because in my mind such a concept would just be sooooooo perfect to play in Oofta's world!

He already has four players ready to go who created PC's conforming to his campaign conceits.

Surely Oofta should not have to do anything but say: "It seems like my DM style isn't for you Bro; peace out, and good luck!"

Because we both agree that no GM should be forced right?

The GM shoud not be forced.

However I think, percentage-wise the number of player who deadset and uncompromising on their racial choice isabout the same as DM deadset and uncompromising on finding where the players fit in their world.

There should be no obligation of the DM to suggest where a player might see an interesting idea they might ant to play.

However to me, it's a very bad sign and major red flag if a DM is extremely obstinate on suggesting ideas to the player or is very dismissive to the idea on finding what a player might like. It can happen innocently. The DM is fairly new. The DM is not very energetic that day. But not caring what a player's mind might be going trips my alarms as a player and DM.

Same alarms triggers if a player is just as stborn and refusing reasonable suggestions after an honest discussion on their desires.

 

[Jaeger]

However to me, it's a very bad sign and major red flag if a DM is extremely obstinate on suggesting ideas to the player or is very dismissive to the idea on finding what a player might like...

We might be talking past each other here...

If a DM states up front what the restrictions are for his game; then he is acting in good faith.

That simply cannot be construed as a bad sign, or a red flag, by any rational person.

You are either down to play campaign X, or you are not. So you move on and find a DM/Group that plays campaign Y, which allows concept Z.

Such situations surely cannot be considered controversial or malicious to an individual in any way. This is just part of the normal process of a player trying to find a group that they click with.

I voted with my feet on three different groups after a session or two before I found my current one that I have been with for over five years and regularly GM for.

Drow ranger and Kender anything are no goes for the sake of the multiverse.

Truth to power brother. Preach it.

 

[Al'Kelhar]

Obviously you just didn't cast it at high enough level, the conjurer should have had epic levels like Tasha.

I almost killed my level 4 party with a Living Cloudkill last week. No poison resistance, but some good Con saves. And a storm cleric with Gust of Wind. Still, 5d8 poison damage in a 40-foot-diameter sphere against a cluster of 4th level PCs in a confined space is pretty savage. And memorable!

 

[Zardnaar]

I almost killed my level 4 party with a Living Cloudkill last week. No poison resistance, but some good Con saves. And a storm cleric with Gust of Wind. Still, 5d8 poison damage in a 40-foot-diameter sphere against a cluster of 4th level PCs in a confined space is pretty savage. And memorable!

Damn even I would think twice on using it on 4th level PCs.