D&D General Do you like LOTS of races/ancestries/whatever? If so, why?

Status
Not open for further replies.

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
I asked a question, no hyperbole. If the DM doesn't make the final call, who does?
Apparently it is by committee... :rolleyes:

1669514176926.png
 

log in or register to remove this ad




Levistus's_Leviathan

5e Freelancer
Do you think all forms of entertainment would be better if the details were up for a vote?
Nope. Some might sometimes, like this particular issue, but definitely not all of them. There's a big difference between watching a movie or TV show and playing a TTRPG. Playing a TTRPG inherently relies on more cooperation and compromise than watching visual media, playing a single player video game, or reading a book.
 

Mecheon

Sacabambaspis
What other option is there? That "compromise" really means let the player do whatever they want? What about the other players at the table? What about the DM's enjoyment of the game?
If enjoyment is ruined because my friend, a first-time D&D player, asks what races are available and goes "Oh hey, Tabaxi, they remind me of Khajit in exceedingly popular RPG franchise Elder Scrolls, I would like to play one", I got significant questions

I asked a question, no hyperbole. If the DM doesn't make the final call, who does?
D&D is a group setting. If the group all decides that they want to make the next campaign Mr Toad the Bullywug and Mr Frog the Grippli and they're all excited for that, then if the DM is against it, the DM will very quickly find themselves not a DM any more because the group will just, leave and find another one
 

Hussar

Legend
Well, not everyone feels exactly the same way, but @Hussar has certainly said that the DM should just find a way to do what the player wants. Hardly compromise.

Note I was clearly speaking for myself and not for others. I do strongly believe that dms who are so enamoured with their own setting that they would rather a player leave their table than accept a new idea is toxic to the hobby and has caused far more problems than it ever solved.
 

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
D&D is a group setting.
True.

If the group all decides that they want to make the next campaign Mr Toad the Bullywug and Mr Frog the Grippli and they're all excited for that, then if the DM is against it, the DM will very quickly find themselves not a DM any more because the group will just, leave and find another one
Then they would be welcome to leave and do that, or have one of them run that game. I would not even want to play in it. I would find it silly and ridiculous, and I take my RPG time more seriously than that. I want adventure and fun, certainly, but not things I would consider worthless.

When they are done, they would be welcome to come back. If someone else ran it, I would step out until they had finished and rejoin them afterwards. The same thing happens if a group wants to play a different RPG I have no interest in.
 

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
Note I was clearly speaking for myself and not for others. I do strongly believe that dms who are so enamoured with their own setting that they would rather a player leave their table than accept a new idea is toxic to the hobby and has caused far more problems than it ever solved.
I don't think worldbuilders are looking to solve any problems for the hobby. You don't care about worldbuilding, and that's fine, but it's also probably why we won't see eye to eye on a lot of things, because worldbuilding is the most important part of the hobby for me, and certainly the most fun.
 


Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top