D&D 5E We Would Hate A BG3 Campaign

[Crimson Longinus]

So one thing that strikes me odd that some people simply seem to want to play some species in a vacuum. Like they don't know or care what the setting is like, they just want to be an elf or something. But certainly elves of different worlds are pretty significantly different things? Tolkien's elves are not Pratchett's evens and Athasian elves are nor Faerûnian elves and so forth. So even if we assumed that elves existed in the setting, I still would first want to know what elves of this world are like before I would decide playing one.

 

[pemerton]

So one thing that strikes me odd that some people simply seem to want to play some species in a vacuum. Like they don't know or care what the setting is like, they just want to be an elf or something. But certainly elves of different worlds are pretty significantly different things? Tolkien's elves are not Pratchett's evens and Athasian elves are nor Faerûnian elves and so forth. So even if we assumed that elves existed in the setting, I still would first want to know what elves of this world are like before I would decide playing one.

I think this tells us something about the nature of the typical FRPG setting as far as its actual function - namely, supporting the play of a fantasy adventure RPG - is concerned. My impression is that many players are not interested in, and don't take seriously, the FRPG setting as a work of art.

I can report, from my own experience, that I don't take GH seriously as a work of art. It's purpose is almost entirely utilitarian.

I say "almost" because, in serving the utilitarian purpose of serving up both high fantasy/JRRT-esque tropes and pulp/S&S/REH-esque tropes, it does convey some of the same aesthetic as those works of fiction. But the fact that it does both at once in itself betrays its limits as a work of art - it has no real depth at all.

Which is fine - the depth can be brought in play; that's part of the point and pleasure of RPGing.

 

[Oofta]

No problem. Which is why I clarified.

Just offering different tools to help further negotiations.

I take it you wouldn't ultilize my suggestion of settling it via an (in character) duel?

In character? Nah. Nerf guns at 10 paces? Maybe.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

I have. I don't personally think it is of much value here. Someone saying you can't play an Illrigger Flumph because this is a Planejammer campaign, not a Spellscape campaign, is not being an "ostracizer," which seems to me to be the only one of the five alleged fallacies (which are actually just falsehoods) even remotely related to the topic at hand.

I could see a--weak--argument that #2, "Friends accept me as I am," might be claimed if one is asserting that a refusal to permit X is a denial of your identity. I just...don't think that that is true. I am not a dragonborn. I like them; I appreciate their style, aesthetics, and prototypical culture; I enjoy analyzing how their different physiology would affect them culturally vs humans; but I am not one. If a person genuinely believes that "dragonborn" is part of their actual identity, they have much bigger problems than the alleged Geek Social "Fallacies."

That said, the author does point at the actual fallacy which underlies the use of these falsehoods: the motte-and-bailey. Anything you can summarize as, to quote the article, "It’s difficult to debunk the pathological [claim] without seeming to argue against its reasonable form", is a textbook motte-and-bailey fallacy, which is a specialized subtype of the fallacy of equivocation, as it treats an unobjectionable true (but often trivial) claim as being identical to a much stronger but quite debatable claim.

I see variations of #1 and #2, and maybe a bit of #3, in the arguments against "the DM has decreed something about his game world which the group has agreed upon that doesn't allow a person to have request X". I don't commonly frequent geek/nerd circles, despite being somewhat geeky/nerdy, and working in an industry that historically is populated by geeks/nerds (software development). Having visited geek/nerd circles, some of the common behaviours there leave me scratching my head (I have seen 1 through 5 in action). I mean, I have empathy for it... there are many people in this world who get a rough introduction to socialisation. That sucks. I don't fully understand though why people drop into these behaviours instead of choosing other routes. Is it a defense mechanism of some kind? Probably, but I couldn't say for sure.

To sum up, in a non-geek/nerd group, someone bringing up the request I mentioned upthread would be met with first, consideration. If that request went against the grain of the group, it would be politely rejected. At that point, the requestor would either accept the fact that they were part of a social group and go with the group's decision, or take the initiative to find another group who more closely fit the parameters of their request. There would not be any sort of social trauma resulting from this. Some of the responses in this thread suggest a different result to that interaction, hence my link to the Five Geek Social Fallacies.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I think this tells us something about the nature of the typical FRPG setting as far as its actual function - namely, supporting the play of a fantasy adventure RPG - is concerned. My impression is that many players are not interested in, and don't take seriously, the FRPG setting as a work of art.

I can report, from my own experience, that I don't take GH seriously as a work of art. It's purpose is almost entirely utilitarian.

I say "almost" because, in serving the utilitarian purpose of serving up both high fantasy/JRRT-esque tropes and pulp/S&S/REH-esque tropes, it does convey some of the same aesthetic as those works of fiction. But the fact that it does both at once in itself betrays its limits as a work of art - it has no real depth at all.

Which is fine - the depth can be brought in play; that's part of the point and pleasure of RPGing.

Yup. The whole idea that some random GM has produced this wonderful work of art of world building which must be appreciated like the fine thing it is and set on a pedestal. Sacrilege, you will introduce an ELF into my fine artistic setting masterpiece! Guys, stop being so stuck on yourselves and go have fun. I drew a map in 1976 or so, I still use it, I mean, sure I imagined all sorts of stuff and history and all that jazz back in the day. It was fun, never paid it much attention in play. I'd get out the map and me and my sister and/or my buddies would decide "Well, hey, maybe there's killer kangeroos over here!" I mean so what? Sure its silly. We felt like being silly that day. Maybe a year later we ignored that. Its just a tool for having some fun with.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Yup. The whole idea that some random GM has produced this wonderful work of art of world building which must be appreciated like the fine thing it is and set on a pedestal. Sacrilege, you will introduce an ELF into my fine artistic setting masterpiece! Guys, stop being so stuck on yourselves and go have fun. I drew a map in 1976 or so, I still use it, I mean, sure I imagined all sorts of stuff and history and all that jazz back in the day. It was fun, never paid it much attention in play. I'd get out the map and me and my sister and/or my buddies would decide "Well, hey, maybe there's killer kangeroos over here!" I mean so what? Sure its silly. We felt like being silly that day. Maybe a year later we ignored that. Its just a tool for having some fun with.

You can think I am being pretentious. Fair enough. I think my setting is pretty nice, I put a lot of thought in it. Or at least some thought.
I don't actually think it is any sort of artistic masterpiece, but I made it way I did for a reason. And it is important to me.

And one certainly can be too serious about things. Perhaps I sometimes am. But I also have to say that I hate the attitude of "it is just fantasy, it is all silly anyway so nothing needs to make sense." I just don't find it conductive for having the sort of fun I seek from RPGs, or from fiction in general.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

Yup. The whole idea that some random GM has produced this wonderful work of art of world building which must be appreciated like the fine thing it is and set on a pedestal. Sacrilege, you will introduce an ELF into my fine artistic setting masterpiece! Guys, stop being so stuck on yourselves and go have fun. I drew a map in 1976 or so, I still use it, I mean, sure I imagined all sorts of stuff and history and all that jazz back in the day. It was fun, never paid it much attention in play. I'd get out the map and me and my sister and/or my buddies would decide "Well, hey, maybe there's killer kangeroos over here!" I mean so what? Sure its silly. We felt like being silly that day. Maybe a year later we ignored that. Its just a tool for having some fun with.

I'm not even on the side that this post is attacking and I'm finding this a rude and reductionist argument. Not understanding these drive by attacks on this thread. It's puerile.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

Yup. The whole idea that some random GM has produced this wonderful work of art of world building which must be appreciated like the fine thing it is and set on a pedestal. Sacrilege, you will introduce an ELF into my fine artistic setting masterpiece! Guys, stop being so stuck on yourselves and go have fun. I drew a map in 1976 or so, I still use it, I mean, sure I imagined all sorts of stuff and history and all that jazz back in the day. It was fun, never paid it much attention in play. I'd get out the map and me and my sister and/or my buddies would decide "Well, hey, maybe there's killer kangeroos over here!" I mean so what? Sure its silly. We felt like being silly that day. Maybe a year later we ignored that. Its just a tool for having some fun with.

While I agree that fun is paramount…

I do think it’s fine for a DM to have a curated and limited range of options if they want in a particular campaign.

I really don’t have a ton of limits when I DM, but don’t think all campaigns have to have everything either.

Why does someone always have to give up what they want to do? Players can shop around and so should DMs. It’s about goodness of fit. I like 5e RAI. A friend mixed in 3e and tons of houserules. Can you imagine me demanding he play 5e RAI? I politely declined. Others played.

Again, I am very liberal in what flies when I DM, but why would I demand that of someone else? It’s their campaign and their group. Heck are we saying a DM should never experiment with all human world or whatever?

There are so many choices of class and race. So so many. We can say why does the dm exclude drow in this one campaign? But also why must this player choose the one in 100 things excluded?

It’s fine to have incongruent and humorous things in a campaign. I think it is also OK for a DM to want a tighter fit.

I am just not into to telling others how they must create even if my style differs a lot.

 

[Maxperson]

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?

It really depends on the situation. I despise dragonborn. Not the concept, but the fact that the race with a lot of blood of the mighty dragons is no stronger than a halfling, gnome or human. They should be FAR stronger than those races, but aren't due to balance reasons which destroys the race for me. The existence of that race diminishes the grandeur of dragons for me, so I just ban it outright. It doesn't exist. There is no compromise from me on this point since it affects my enjoyment of the game.

On the other hand, I also have no race of Warforged in my world, but if a player wanted to play one(and they have), I would come up with a unique story for how a living construct came to be. Compromise is absolutely possible and would happen.

On the other hand, if the race would be disruptive to the game, even if compromise would otherwise be possible, I won't allow it.

Circumstances matter.

 

[Maxperson]

I mean, how is playing a dragonborn, or an aarakocra, upsetting to anyone?

I explained how it is to me. Though I wouldn't term it upsetting so much as having a significant negative impact on my fun. My mother being robbed would be upsetting. Dragonborn in my game would just diminish my fun.