D&D General The Tyranny of Rarity

[Helldritch]

That's the problem I have. That player usually justifies this because they're the DM.

And this particular DM has the backing votes of his current 12 players. Both groups votes on what will be accepted for the current campaign.

What would you, as a DM, do if one player wanted to impose a tolkienesque restricted racial on you and the other players happen agree with him?
I am very curious.

 

[hawkeyefan]

There's a chicken-and-egg problem here.

If I'm DMing, not only am I curating the list of available species but I'm also a) tweaking the rules (e.g. ASI bonus/penalty, species abilities, etc.) for each one and b) designing the setting to suit those species and their histories etc. The players need to see those tweaked rules in order to have enough info to roll up their characters, meaning that by the time the players get access to it the list of available species is already locked and loaded and the setting has been designed.

The other option is to have the players in effect roll up their characters blind as regards just what their non-Human PCs will have going for them. Somehow doing it that way doesn't seem so appealing.

None of what you say here does anything to counter the idea of DM as control freak. It seems to double down on it.

There aren’t only two options as you describe. A GM could let the players make their PCs and then use what the players have come up with to craft the lore of their world. The GM doesn’t have to decide all that stuff ahead of character creation. Or even ahead of actual play, for that matter.

 

[Vaalingrade]

And this particular DM has the backing votes of his current 12 players. Both groups votes on what will be accepted for the current campaign.

What would you, as a DM, do if one player wanted to impose a tolkienesque restricted racial on you and the other players happen agree with him?
I am very curious.

I don't think that theoretical is asking what you think. They can play whatever races they want anyway.

If they don't want to play in my setting, we don't have to do that either. I've run D&D games in everything from Middle Earth and Mistborn to Dresden Files Chicago and the DC Universe.

 

[hawkeyefan]

It is clear that the cantina aspect is not for every table, at least not mine and certainly not for long that is for sure.

I don’t think the issue is “the cantina aspect”. The issue is “DM Preference > Player Preference”.

Now this opens up a question. In the end, which one has the most to loose by adopting a stern stance? The answer is easy, the player. A DM can always find more players but the reverse is not true. I have been forming DM for 30 years now and the shortage of DMs has always been a thing.

For every story like this, there’s a story about the DM who demanded his players play his way or else there’d be no game…and so they left and started another game where they were able to have more choice.

And these days, with online gaming as an option, there’s really no shortage of players or GMs.

And I the same. What I have trouble though, is when one player tries to impose his/her views on the other players or DMs. That is simply a big NO! For me.

Change “player” and “players or DMs” to the more general “participants” and then see if that changes your feeling.

“…when one participant tries to impose his/her views on the other participants.”

This is the issue. Does the DM enjoy special privilege or not?

 

[Vaalingrade]

For every story like this, there’s a story about the DM who demanded his players play his way or else there’d be no game…and so they left and started another game where they were able to have more choice.

Our group is mostly DMs who play in each other's games with a few forever players due to their first few games resulting in us saying 'never again'. Mostly because of being too domineering.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Whoever taught this forum 'one true way' and 'badwrongfun' needs to be found and punished for the crime of murdering honest discussion.

Do you not think your way is better? In your view, are other methods of running a game than the one you prefer equally valid?

 

[Oofta]

Whoever taught this forum 'one true way' and 'badwrongfun' needs to be found and punished for the crime of murdering honest discussion.

When people state that anyone who limts races is a control freak it sure does sound like badwrongfun to me. You have stated multiple times that a DM making this decision is "a problem".

What problem does it cause, other than you just saying that it is?

 

[Helldritch]

I don't think that theoretical is asking what you think. They can play whatever races they want anyway.

If they don't want to play in my setting, we don't have to do that either. I've run D&D games in everything from Middle Earth and Mistborn to Dresden Files Chicago and the DC Universe.

That did not answer my question.

I don’t think the issue is “the cantina aspect”. The issue is “DM Preference > Player Preference”.



For every story like this, there’s a story about the DM who demanded his players play his way or else there’d be no game…and so they left and started another game where they were able to have more choice.

And these days, with online gaming as an option, there’s really no shortage of players or GMs.



Change “player” and “players or DMs” to the more general “participants” and then see if that changes your feeling.

“…when one participant tries to impose his/her views on the other participants.”

This is the issue. Does the DM enjoy special privilege or not?

And change the DM with football referee and make it like a player is asking for the right to punt at the goal from the 10 yard mark every time the game is stopped for any reason. How is that?

D&D is a game where the referee does a lot more than the players. A whole lot more. A DM must care for each players, he must make sure his world building has a minimum of cohesion, he must adapt and tailor the adventures to his players (or creat ones, or minimally read what he bought), the DM is usually the one buying the MM, DMG and often more than one copy of the PHB. The DM buys books such as adventures, extensions such as MToF. And a single whinning player should always have his ways over the DM? No thx. In this era of digital media, people still prefer to play at a table. And it happens that this table belongs to the DM. All this work and money's gives the DM some rights to have the kind of game he/she wants. Players and DM shares a symbiotic relationship in the game. When one player wants to impose his views, this player simply becomes a parasite on the the group.

And this comes from a DM that has a very democratic approach to the game.

 

[Greg K]

I've run D&D games in everything from Middle Earth and Mistborn to Dresden Files Chicago and the DC Universe.

Maybe, this is the difference. If I see players wanting to play or model characters based on Dresden Files, DC Universe (or other properties (e.g. Star Wars)), I am not using D&D. I am pulling out an entirely different game system (or possibly a choice between multiple systems depending on the genre).

 

[Vaalingrade]

Because it's done in the context of the DM being some kind of authority

That did not answer my question.

Then I don't know what you were asking.