D&D (2024) No Dwarf, Halfling, and Orc suborgins, lineages, and legacies

[Bacon Bits]

What I would be looking to see is:
A fantasy RPG setting
That's 5e/D&D compatible
That isn't based on an existing media IP
And doesn't have a place for the twelve PHB class archetypes in it.

Isn't this just a recipe for a fantasy heartbreaker?

 

[Hussar]

would it be better to just not mention those classes or call them optional cannon?

I do not get the human drive to subvert the rules on a whim.

what is a non-core caster?

resistance is to be expected but why is it so high?

I can understand if a player loves both a set race and class and would be turned off a setting without either but few people are that focused so what makes people do this?

Sorry, I meant non-full caster. Half casters are cool. I just needed a very, very large break from the D&D magic system for a while. And, honestly, this has been the most fun I've had running a game in a long time.

Resistance is so high because players could not give the slightest rat's petoot about your campaign. They don't. They don't care. Getting a player to read a single page campaign setting document is like pulling teeth. Endless streams of Man with No Name characters from far away with no family, no roots and nothing tying them to the game. Dance monkey DM and entertain us.

 

[TwoSix]

Thankfully my experiences are quite different.

Same. I've run into it a few times, but generally my players are pretty good about not creating character conflicts.

 

[Hussar]

Same. I've run into it a few times, but generally my players are pretty good about not creating character conflicts.

True, I'm not really talking about character conflicts. The characters don't conflict with the setting very often. But, IME, players will create characters without any real connection to the setting, presuming that everything is so generic that any basic background will do. Although, yeah, again IME, any time I said, "I don't want X in the game", I immediately got asked to make exceptions.

 

[Remathilis]

Isn't this just a recipe for a fantasy heartbreaker?

I mean basically. Never stopped anyone before.

 

[Mind of tempest]

True, I'm not really talking about character conflicts. The characters don't conflict with the setting very often. But, IME, players will create characters without any real connection to the setting, presuming that everything is so generic that any basic background will do. Although, yeah, again IME, any time I said, "I don't want X in the game", I immediately got asked to make exceptions.

do you know how to pitch the setting to people?
I myself prefer to play characters who are outsiders to the area as I can't relate to much else but I do care if I fit in setting-wise if there is a vision.

I mean basically. Never stopped anyone before.

to my knowledge they just tend to more add on top rather than get rid of them. Far too many have catfolk for some reason, why always cats?

 

[Yaarel]

Oh, hey, you'll get no argument from me.

But, I do know that I approach chargen from a very different perspective from the player's I've gamed with over the years. Most players, IME, will create a character, then try to shoehorn that character into the campaign with pretty much zero thought about the campaign, expecting that whatever the DM has planned will be generic enough that their character will be able to fit in no matter what.

I've rarely, if ever, seen a player think about how the character will fit in at the table and in the campaign, when creating a character.

When starting a game, I ask the player what genre of game they want to play. Determine the mood, things to explore, etcetera.

Then I tweak the campaign around that, and they are already thinking about what characters they want in this setting.

 

[Remathilis]

Even aside the Dark Sun, I feel "every setting must have everything" is a poisonous idea that thwarts creativity and I really wish we could abandon it.

The issue I think is that any company who is investing energy into selling a 5e setting is going to want the widest possible net, and curated settings are fairly niche markets. I don't think the market for a Dark Sun like setting where things are removed and changed is as wide as an Eberron like setting where things are purely additive. Which is why WotC has moved many of its settings towards purely additive and why 3pp's have opted to follow that trend. Giving new toys sell, taking toys away doesn't.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

It is not only about banning classes and races from the PHB but from other sources. Would you allow psionic artificiers, or primal sorcerers, totemist shamans with incarnum soulmelds, or martial adepts fighting in the gladiator arenas? DS could be fabulous to sell T-shirts o a videogame, but horrible to sell more crunch sourcebooks.

Not only classes, but also subclasses, or the magic items.

 

[CreamCloud0]

When starting a game, I ask the player what genre of game they want to play. Determine the mood, things to explore, etcetera.

Then I tweak the campaign around that, and they are already thinking about what characters they want in this setting.

thing is, how often does the player ever ask what kind of campaign the GM wants to run and tweak their characters around that? far less often i'm guessing, the give and take is not equal here.