D&D 5E We Would Hate A BG3 Campaign

[Oofta]

Huh? Isn't exactly one of the compromises I stated the one you would apparently go for as DM if the player says he wants to play an evil character?
You wrote:

I wrote:

Sounds like the same thing?

Als, props to the spirits of the ancestor Barbarian idea, that might indeed work, depending on what drove the player to want to deal in necromancy.
[/QUOTE]
But the player is not running an evil PC, they're playing one that used to be evil and is seeking redemption. I don't really care what the player puts on their character sheet, what they did as part of their backstory, I only care about what they say and do during the campaign.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

It seems DM and player got something they want out of it by the DM actually working with the player to find a compromise. Not: "I am the DM, my word is final, your ideas suck, and I am really tired of all these entitled players these days ..."

(also, I think my previous reply included a broken quote that now broke your quote, sorry about that)

 

[Oofta]

It seems DM and player got something they want out of it by the DM actually working with the player to find a compromise. Not: "I am the DM, my word is final, your ideas suck, and I am really tired of all these entitled players these days ..."

(also, I think my previous reply included a broken quote that now broke your quote, sorry about that)

Sometimes there simply isn't a compromise. If someone wants to play a dragonborn where dragonborn (or dragons even) don't exist then what possible "compromise" is there?

 

[mamba]

It seems DM and player got something they want out of it by the DM actually working with the player to find a compromise.

no one ever said otherwise, it is the ‘the player is always right’ bit that gets pushback.

And to not put words in anyone’s mouth, here is the actual quote

Don't you think the DM should ever "get their way"?

Yes? I just think players should too. Because that's extremely achievable. As in, essentially all of the time.

So the player is essentially always right, with that word doing a lot of heavy lifting

 

[Oofta]

no one ever said otherwise, it is the ‘the player is always right’ bit that gets pushback.

And to not put words in anyone’s mouth, here is the actual quote




So the player is essentially always right, with that word doing a lot of heavy lifting

Since no "good" reason was ever provided, and the reasons given were dismissed because they never happen (e.g. nobody ever runs a campaign in the same world more than once) the "essentially" is optional since it seems to be meaningless.

 

[mamba]

the "essentially" is optional since it seems to be meaningless.

I agree, but that is a conclusion I was told not to draw

 

[CleverNickName]

Sometimes there simply isn't a compromise. If someone wants to play a dragonborn where dragonborn (or dragons even) don't exist then what possible "compromise" is there?

There's always a compromise, if you're playing with friends. The key is to be flexible.

Something like this came up in my game a couple of years ago. One of my players really wanted to play a tortle, but there are no such creatures in my campaign.

The compromise we came up with? I "created" a new subrace of Elf, called the Lake Elf. I put "created" in quotes because I actually did very little work: it was a Tortle in every way except the name and description. Instead of a shell granting them a natural armor bonus and 'shell defense' ability, it was their preternatural agility that made them hard to hit, and made it impossible to benefit from armor. They could hold their breath and speak Aquan, and were proficient in Survival. Same bonuses to Strength and Wisdom. Etc.

Nobody noticed or cared that the "lake elf" was really just a tortle with different flavor text.

 

[Oofta]

There's always a compromise, if you're playing with friends. The key is to be flexible.

Something like this came up in my game a couple of years ago. One of my players really wanted to play a tortle, but there are no such creatures in my campaign.

The compromise we came up with? I "created" a new subrace of Elf, called the Lake Elf. I put "created" in quotes because I actually did very little work: it was a Tortle in every way except the name and description. Instead of a shell granting them a natural armor bonus and 'shell defense' ability, it was their preternatural agility that made them hard to hit, and made it impossible to benefit from armor. They could hold their breath and speak Aquan, and were proficient in Survival. Same bonuses to Strength and Wisdom. Etc.

Nobody noticed or cared that the "lake elf" was really just a tortle with different flavor text.

Giving the player what they want by simply changing the fluff is not compromise to me.

Also the implication that if you actually like your players the DM will always find a way gets tiresome.

 

[CleverNickName]

Giving the player what they want by simply changing the fluff is not compromise to me.

Also the implication that if you actually like your players the DM will always find a way gets tiresome.

I was trying to imply that as long as everyone is on friendly terms, they will look for ways to compromise. "Giving the player what they want" is only one side of the discussion, and it isn't more important than the other side ("giving the DM what they want.") But if either side is unwilling to work with the other, the situation isn't going to stay friendly for long.

 

[Oofta]

I was trying to imply that as long as everyone is on friendly terms, they will look for ways to compromise. "Giving the player what they want" is only one side of the discussion, and it isn't more important than the other side ("giving the DM what they want.") But if either side is unwilling to work with the other, the situation isn't going to stay friendly for long.

I posted above why I disagree. In addition if you're so dead set that you must play a specific race and will be unable to maintain a friendly relationship if you cannot, that's a massive red flag.

There are going to be times I disagree with a DM. We discuss it, the DM makes a final decision, and we move on. I may be temporarily dissapointed but it's not going to affect my opinion of the person.