Unpopular opinions go here

[MGibster]

Having non-Human races in games is largely pointless.

I mean, I kind of agree with you. In most fantasy games, and by most I mean D&D, it doesn't really matter whether your character as a halfling, elf, half-elf, half-orc, or human. The game is going to play pretty much the same no matter what. In a lot of stories, like Star Trek, the species of a character like Spock, Worf, or Data are used to examine a particular type of story. But for RPGs these days, homogenizing the various PC species seems to be En Vogue. And I say En Vogue because "I'm never gonna get it."

 

[Micah Sweet]

I mean, I kind of agree with you. In most fantasy games, and by most I mean D&D, it doesn't really matter whether your character as a halfling, elf, half-elf, half-orc, or human. The game is going to play pretty much the same no matter what. In a lot of stories, like Star Trek, the species of a character like Spock, Worf, or Data are used to examine a particular type of story. But for RPGs these days, homogenizing the various PC species seems to be En Vogue. And I say En Vogue because "I'm never gonna get it."

Yeah, the trick is not to let the tyranny of the majority dictate your game.

 

[Hussar]

None of that matters. You don't need any of that content to convey the narrative effects they emulate, and the core resolution resolves all questions of what does or doesn't happen.
((Bold MIne))

No it doesn't. The core mechanic tells you if the action succeeds or fails. Nothing else. It does not tell you anything about the results of that success. IOW, you cannot use the core mechanic (d20+mods vs DC) to determine damage on an attack, nor can it tell you how much damage a given character can withstand. All the core mechanic tells you is that you successfully attacked. Great! Does that mean I kill the dragon? Oh, wait, we cannot actually know unless we A) totally ad hoc the results, none of which are guided by mechanics) or B) use HP or some other form of damage results.

So, no, you are mistaken here. There most certainly ARE games where the core mechanic tells you the results. But D&D is not one of them.

 

[Hussar]

I mean, I kind of agree with you. In most fantasy games, and by most I mean D&D, it doesn't really matter whether your character as a halfling, elf, half-elf, half-orc, or human. The game is going to play pretty much the same no matter what. In a lot of stories, like Star Trek, the species of a character like Spock, Worf, or Data are used to examine a particular type of story. But for RPGs these days, homogenizing the various PC species seems to be En Vogue. And I say En Vogue because "I'm never gonna get it."

I'm going to disagree with the "these days" thing. In D&D is almost never matters whether your character is race X or race Y. Other than maybe the racial antipathy tables in the old 1e PHB, it was never a thing. The whole "Star Wars Cantina" thing has been around for a VERY long time.

And if we stick to D&D, there is almost zero advice for DM's to make the campaign based on the characters played. It's almost always based on whatever the DM wants to run and you make characters. The character you make has pretty much zero impact on how the campaign plays out most of the time. Whether my fighter is an elf, a half orc or a human, Tyranny of Dragons plays identically.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

And if we stick to D&D, there is almost zero advice for DM's to make the campaign based on the characters played. It's almost always based on whatever the DM wants to run and you make characters. The character you make has pretty much zero impact on how the campaign plays out most of the time. Whether my fighter is an elf, a half orc or a human, Tyranny of Dragons plays identically.

It would be adding a difficulty level to ask WotC to help customize mass market adventures to each group's party. Adventures like Strixhaven show publishers can fumble even doing a pretty basic campaign.

That said, it's been common advice outside of the DMGs I've read (so not 4E) to build homebrew campaigns around the players' desires for a long time.

Instead of being the DM who harrumphs that a given race isn't going to be in a certain campaign, when faced with a player who loves, say, harrengons, make them a major race in your campaign world. If someone has a Pirate background, plan some pirate adventures (this exact one took me longer than I care to admit to do in my campaign).

 

[Jd Smith1]

It would be adding a difficulty level to ask WotC to help customize mass market adventures to each group's party. Adventures like Strixhaven show publishers can fumble even doing a pretty basic campaign.

That said, it's been common advice outside of the DMGs I've read (so not 4E) to build homebrew campaigns around the players' desires for a long time.

Instead of being the DM who harrumphs that a given race isn't going to be in a certain campaign, when faced with a player who loves, say, harrengons, make them a major race in your campaign world. If someone has a Pirate background, plan some pirate adventures (this exact one took me longer than I care to admit to do in my campaign).

I see your general point, but I'm not inclined to support it. It's not the GM's job to spoon-feed entertainment.

I design the campaign I want to run, and the players can be part of it, or not. Now, I'll throw in tweaks to meet player interests and hopes if they fit, but if someone brings in a pirate into a campaign aimed at land operations, that's his problem.

 

[Thomas Shey]

It would be adding a difficulty level to ask WotC to help customize mass market adventures to each group's party. Adventures like Strixhaven show publishers can fumble even doing a pretty basic campaign.

That said, it's been common advice outside of the DMGs I've read (so not 4E) to build homebrew campaigns around the players' desires for a long time.

Instead of being the DM who harrumphs that a given race isn't going to be in a certain campaign, when faced with a player who loves, say, harrengons, make them a major race in your campaign world. If someone has a Pirate background, plan some pirate adventures (this exact one took me longer than I care to admit to do in my campaign).

This is very much the 13th Age tack.

 

[Emberashh]

IOW, you cannot use the core mechanic (d20+mods vs DC) to determine damage on an attack, nor can it tell you how much damage a given character can withstand.

None of this matters. You roll to win the fight.

And it's telling you're confused if you think DNDs core resolution roll has anything to do with "attacking".

 

[Micah Sweet]

It would be adding a difficulty level to ask WotC to help customize mass market adventures to each group's party. Adventures like Strixhaven show publishers can fumble even doing a pretty basic campaign.

That said, it's been common advice outside of the DMGs I've read (so not 4E) to build homebrew campaigns around the players' desires for a long time.

Instead of being the DM who harrumphs that a given race isn't going to be in a certain campaign, when faced with a player who loves, say, harrengons, make them a major race in your campaign world. If someone has a Pirate background, plan some pirate adventures (this exact one took me longer than I care to admit to do in my campaign).

So if the DM wants one thing, and the player wants another, your advice is to do what the player wants?

 

[aramis erak]

You don't need spell cards. It's a reference book. You need to know something, look it up.

Looking up rules in session is something which most OSR evangelists consider adjacent to heresy.

Many others from the first decade of RPGing, myself amongst them, don't like needing reference to a book in play. We do it, but prefer to not need to.