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

[CleverNickName]

This is an interesting line of discussion, and I've seen it pop up in other threads. There are two schools of thought:
A. The players should adapt their characters to the world that the DM has created
B. The DM should adapt the world to the characters the players have created

And both schools are correct in varying aspects. The players don't dictate which challenges they will find in a dungeon, and it's not the DM's job to dictate the characters' actions, for example. But this thread is strictly about character race, and the DMG has some insight specifically for this example. From page 26 of the Dungeon Master's Guide:

It's pretty clear that the DM is well within bounds to restrict or even prohibit certain options for character creation, including prohibited races. It's also pretty clear that the DM is expected to communicate this clearly to the players, as they start developing the campaign, in writing.

Interpretations will vary, of course. My two cents: the DM isn't "wrong" for prohibiting certain races and other options from the campaign, nor are the players "wrong" for complaining about restrictions that the DM failed to properly inform them of.

 

[Scott Christian]

If a DM allows centaurs into a campaign as a playable race, then it would be really strange to have a bunch of adventures where they couldn't participate at all. There is a difference between making an environment impossible for one or more PCs and making an environment that is extra challenging for one or more PCs. Not really sure of the point of your questions.

Sorry, I thought, in this scenario, the DM did not want centaurs for this reason, but the player insisted that they play a centaur. Where the players go after character creation is often up to them. I was merely implying that many of those places might leave the centaur player on the sideline.

 

[Oofta]

Sorry. The joke didn’t land.

You said “There is no "fantasy version of a wall" that a centaur could climb.”

To which I replied “they’re called stairs.”

The fantasy version of a wall centaurs could climb is called stairs.

I’m agreeing with you. Though apparently badly.

It's been a long day! Good day, but long. I should have realized you were just horsing around, but neigh. I'd trot out more excuses, but to me anyone playing a half man half horse just wants to be the centaur of attention.

 

[overgeeked]

It's been a long day! Good day, but long. I should have realized you were just horsing around, but neigh. I'd trot out more excuses, but to me anyone playing a half man half horse just wants to be the centaur of attention.

I really wish there was such a thing as a good pun.

 

[Maxperson]

My feeling on the centaur and world obstacles tangent is this. I'm not going to avoid things just because centaur. However, I will also not have tons of things that will exclude the centaur. If the party has to figure a way up a mountain, they will just have to take centaur into consideration. Most adventures will not involve mountain climbing.

 

[Maxperson]

It's been a long day! Good day, but long. I should have realized you were just horsing around, but neigh. I'd trot out more excuses, but to me anyone playing a half man half horse just wants to be the centaur of attention.

If this goes on for too long, will we be beating a dead centaur when posting?

 

[Maxperson]

I really wish there was such a thing as a good pun.

Never. There are only terrible puns and great puns. No middle ground to be had.

 

[Gammadoodler]

If you want to ignore the fact that there is no way a centaur could climb a ladder, it's completely up to you. But I've seen it (in previous editions) and most of the players just groaned an shook their heads. It's not self-inflicted, some thing would just be physically impossible. If you want to ignore it, fine. The rest of your group may not agree. There is no "fantasy version of a wall" that a centaur could climb.

Again the DM controls the fantasy. In a world where centaurs can be adventurers and adventurers need to climb ladders, either some version of equipment will exist to enable it, or the centaur can just do it. EZPZ.

It's all imaginary; the only things that are physically impossible, are the things the DM decides are physically impossible.

Also, this is not to say that centaurs should have zero issues. IIRC, they are still large creatures and so subject to the same mechanical issues other large creatures run into. Anything beyond that is just fiat.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Interpretations will vary, of course. My two cents: the DM isn't "wrong" for prohibiting certain races and other options from the campaign, nor are the players "wrong" for complaining about restrictions that the DM failed to properly inform them of.

For my part, the more interesting question is not when the DM has failed to inform anyone, but during the conversation about that information.

That is: What are the appropriate behaviors for both sides, (prospective) players and DMs, during the period between "hey do you want to play D&D" and "alright, Session 1 is Saturday"?

Because it's frankly pretty trivial if you go for either of the other situations. Obviously if the DM fails do do her due diligence before/during Session 0, they're in the wrong. And, equally obviously, if a player agrees to abide by restrictions and then defies them later, it's petulant and rude.

But what about the interim period?

Seriously. Nobody seems to want to discuss that. We either brush it under the rug with "well of course you don't want to play with bad-faith people" or we entrench ourselves in talking as if one side already were acting in bad faith. Almost everyone--and I really do mean almost everyone, including the people who agree with me--seems to spend little to no time actually talking about how one acts IN ORDER TO exhibit good faith, for either side. Yet that is by far the more interesting discussion, not breaking down into trivialities, but requiring that we really think and express the values we're seeking, requiring that we listen to and respect others' values before we can find solutions (because, as with everything I've said along the way here, there is no single solution, there not only can but SHOULD be different solutions appropriate to different circumstances).

How does a DM with "vision" communicate that fairly, and respond appropriately to players that aren't automatically on board?

How does a player with "inspiration" share that with the DM in a constructive way, so they can play enthusiastically in the world offered?

 

[Swarmkeeper]

If you want to ignore the fact that there is no way a centaur could climb a ladder, it's completely up to you. But I've seen it (in previous editions) and most of the players just groaned an shook their heads. It's not self-inflicted, some thing would just be physically impossible. If you want to ignore it, fine. The rest of your group may not agree. There is no "fantasy version of a wall" that a centaur could climb.

Again the DM controls the fantasy. In a world where centaurs can be adventurers and adventurers need to climb ladders, either some version of equipment will exist to enable it, or the centaur can just do it. EZPZ.

It's all imaginary; the only things that are physically impossible, are the things the DM decides are physically impossible.

Also, this is not to say that centaurs should have zero issues. IIRC, they are still large creatures and so subject to the same mechanical issues other large creatures run into. Anything beyond that is just fiat.

Who knew... there's actually special rules for Centaur climbing! First appeared in Guildmaster's Guide to Ravnica (p 15)

Equine Build.
You count as one size larger when determining your carrying capacity and the weight you can push or drag.
In addition, any climb that requires hands and feet is especially difficult for you because of your equine legs. When you make such a climb, each foot of movement costs you 4 extra feet, instead of the normal 1 extra foot.