• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E When lore and PC options collide…

Which is more important?

  • Lore

  • PC options


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.

overgeeked

B/X Known World
When the DM decides to run Dragonlance, it is no longer the creator's setting - It is the DMs setting, and that of his players.
Yep. Hence the poll. When lore and PC options collide, which wins? Looks like lore is winning. Sorry you disagree.
Possibly, or they followed the letter but not the spirit of the constraints.
We're rules lawyering lore now, too?
That's unfortunate. I see LOTS of creativity from my players, and the more enthused they are about the particular game, the more creative they get. If I see a lack of creativity from them, I tend to assume that something is off with ME and/or the particular game. More often than not, when I change things up - problem fixed.
When I run games the players are quite enthusiastic. They still only smash buttons. My last 5E West Marches game ended months ago and I still get messages from some of the players asking me to start it up again.
Taking input from players is not DM by committee. It's recognizing what the players like and what they want out of the game and making sure that what you are providing can/will match that.
Or you offer a game and if the players are interested they join it. So you have a group that's interested in the game you're offering and there's no problem. Like how most games work.
A disconnect in what the DM is providing and what the players want has been the downfall of just about every failed campaign I've been in/seen/run.
Yes, players who're not actually interested in the game on offer is a major killer of games. Players with hyper-specific ideas of what a game should be like are free to run a game exactly how they want.
1. the DM should have fun doing the "work," if it's not fun for the DM he shouldn't be doing it;
Yep.
2. If the players don't like the work the DM is doing, the amount of that work doesn't matter.
Well, if the players don't like what's offered, they should not sit down at the table. They shouldn't have a seat anyway and start negotiating with the DM to change things to their liking.

You seem to assume a fixed group of players. I don't.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

overgeeked

B/X Known World
Some posters have compared allowing a player to play a half-orc in Krynn to allowing a player to play a Wookie in a Star Trek game.

There have been zero published Star Trek novels where the main antagonist is a Wookie. The fact that a published DL novel has a half-orc antagonist strongly suggests that allowing half-orcs in Krynn is not a big deal.
Well, the author made a mistake and it wasn't caught by the editor. Despite orcs (and by extension half-orcs) explicitly not existing in Dragonlance. That's not the same as one IP holder illegally using something from another IP.
 

hawkeyefan

Legend
LOL. I have to beg my 5E players to do anything more than smash the buttons on their character sheets. I'd literally pay real money to find a few creative players. No one seems interested. It's all cookie-cutter builds and button smashing. That's about as far from of creativity as you can get.

You could, but generally speaking the DM puts in 99% of the work building that setting or learning about the established setting to run the game. The players going out of their way to waste the DM's time is problematic. The DM offering a game and the players opting out because they don't like the presented restrictions is not. The players opting in knowing they're going to torpedo the game because they don't like those presented restrictions is problematic.

So I put these two quotes here side by side because they kind of implky a chicken or egg type situation.

How can you have creative players when all they can contribute is 1% because you're controlling the other 99%?

If you want creative players, you have to allow them to be creative.

The characters the players create are make believe. The players can make other make believe characters.

Right. And the GM can create another setting.

But that's beside the point. My point is I care more about the people I play with than the make believe stuff.

For yourself and no one else.

Yes, of course.
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
Session 0 is not the time for the DM to bring this up though, because as soon as the campaign pitch reaches the players, some of them will start making their PCs.
That's their problem. They can start over during session 0. PCs are rolled up together, in front of everyone.
The campaign pitch should include the limitations.
True, but not for the reason you give above. :)
 


So I put these two quotes here side by side because they kind of implky a chicken or egg type situation.

How can you have creative players when all they can contribute is 1% because you're controlling the other 99%?

If you want creative players, you have to allow them to be creative.
funny thing... I find creative players in 5e all the time. Maybe since I let them do things like play what they want...
 

overgeeked

B/X Known World
Let's see...

Dragonlance Adventures, p49. "There are no halflings or half-orcs in Krynn. Halflings who enter this world are considered kender and gain the special abilities (and obnoxious personalities) of kender in this world. Half-orcs would be considered magical freaks or aberrations as there are no orcs in Krynn."

DA was written by Weis and Hickman and published in 1987. Kendermore was written by someone else two years later. I have no problem trusting that Weis and Hickman know more about the world they created than the author of Kendermore.
 



Voadam

Legend
in the novel "Kendermore", the assassin Denzil is a half-orc
Thanks, it turns out I had read it, I read all six of the preludes, but I have no real memories of it specifically other than thinking the preludes in general were not particularly good.

Looking Kendermore up on Wikipedia under continuity errors it also mentions mislabeling Fint as a mountain dwarf instead of a hill dwarf, and including a werewolf even though lycanthropes are not a Krynn thing.
agin lets say it's a mistake... and 3 people who work on krynn know the theme and feel of krynn not only MADE the mistake but went through months of rewrites and never notices a problem...
Dragonlance Adventures 1987, page 49. "There are no halflings or half-orcs in Krynn. Halflings who enter this world are considered kender and gain the special abilities (and obnoxious personalities) of kender in this world. Half-orcs would be considered magical freaks or aberrations as there are no orcs in Krynn."

I think a bunch of their adjustments of people going in and out of Krynn are pretty nonsensical, but I feel that it was established in the setting book that the setting does not have half-orcs or orcs so the one novel including them is the outlier mistake.

For me this was reinforced in the 3.5 era with the Dragonlance Campaign Setting book, page 212 "The continent of Ansalon is home to strange and fantastic creatures—some merely interesting, others undeniably deadly. Almost all the creatures in the DUNGEONS & DRAGONS Monster Manual are appropriate for a DRAGONLANCE campaign, with a few notable exceptions (primarily driders, drow elves, halflings, lycanthropes, mind flayers, orcs and half-orcs, and titans)."
others who have read it said if you changed it to a half oger or hobgob it would be fine... if simply switching out the title of the race makes the book work then the book shows the orcs are not an issue.
I think that shows that half-races of native Dragonlance races are not an issue in Dragonlance, not orcs. Tanis Half-Elven comes to mind as iconic Dragonlance. Half-Ogres are an established canonical race in Dragonlance RPG books.
correct, and you can tell when something stands out... when superman is killing, when batman is useing a gun, when something shakes the theme and feel of the story. the orc being there and treated like just another character didn't for the people who were in charge... so again I ask how it is possible for that to be true for a novel but at your game just letting a player make his half orc would 'ruin krynn'
And orcs in Dragonlance stand out for many.

For me as a D&D player who read the specific novel it was true for the novel because the novel was generally forgettable for me. :)

Things of that era like the fantastic Weasel's Luck stuck out in my mind much more.

Having read the main trilogy of novels, the 1e setting book, and the 3e setting book, I can see orcs ruining part of the Dragonlance feel of Krynn for many.

As for how is it possible for those in charge not to have caught the setting canon violations? It seems plausible that the author and editor were familiar with TSR D&D novels, AD&D elements, and Dragonlance generally, but not those specific three aspects of the setting that were continuity errors in the novel.

TSR also put out DL16 World of Krynn which contains four adventures, including one that goes nuts with drow, lycanthropes, and the tarasque in Lord Soth's castle.

I see rare one off canon mistakes squeaking through the process as par for the course with TSR's broad mostly consistent Dragonlance portfolio.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top