D&D General Wildly Diverse "Circus Troupe" Adventuring Parties

[Scribe]

wh do people paint there walls more or less identical reasons

Historically, no.

 

[Scribe]

the point i took from scribe was less that "We should stick to the past when playing races/species/whatevers" and more "Other races/species/whatevers had tropes to lean into for a reason".

A little of both. We absolutely have lost the plot and should go back.

 

[Remathilis]

Then why does it exist at all?

Because people want them to?

This isn't an intricate delve into the human psyche. People want to play a pretty elf or a stubborn dwarf or a edgy tiefling. They want to look different, have a few cool powers, and be something a little different from what they see and do everyday.

They want to wear a hat. Hats are cool. There are hundreds of different types of hats from baseball caps to fedoras to beanies, and despite them having the same general function (keep your head warm and/or eyes shaded) people good money on fancy hats for nothing more than fashion.

So I guess I'm saying race in D&D is fashion. It's about making your character look unique and pick up a few perks. Do you need fashion? A utilitarian would probably argue not. But ask Henry Ford what people thought of cars that only come in black.

 

[TiQuinn]

At that band where it's important enough that I won't just change it for anyone's sake but also unimportant enough that I think you're(GM) is crazy for being so pissed or making screeds about it. In table I'm more compromising ofc, but like one of those early posts said; The importang thing is that I get to play my character, and I'm just being polite for your setting and tone.

I think that this underscores how much tables differ. I can understand a GM who puts a lot of effort into their setting and campaign with a level of detail that is makes it a very personal thing to them, but the expectation that every player is going to approach what they offer up with the same enthusiasm is unrealistic, IMO. They have a choice: seek out players who do share that enthusiasm for playing detailed campaigns or meet their players where their players are coming from. The former is probably gonna have them waiting for the right players a long time; not always, but my bet is usually. They’re lucky if they get that kind of player. The latter is easier. Those DMs have to decide for themselves if the juice is worth the squeeze.

 

[Scribe]

Because people want them to?

This isn't an intricate delve into the human psyche. People want to play a pretty elf or a stubborn dwarf or a edgy tiefling. They want to look different, have a few cool powers, and be something a little different from what they see and do everyday.

They want to wear a hat. Hats are cool. There are hundreds of different types of hats from baseball caps to fedoras to beanies, and despite them having the same general function (keep your head warm and/or eyes shaded) people good money on fancy hats for nothing more than fashion.

So I guess I'm saying race in D&D is fashion. It's about making your character look unique and pick up a few perks. Do you need fashion? A utilitarian would probably argue not. But ask Henry Ford what people thought of cars that only come in black.

I mean, I appreciate the clarity of the response, but I just dont see the appeal. I find the direction post Tashas with species to be probably one of the worst aspects of 5/5.5.

 

[GobHag]

I'm also personally not the type that cares about being unique, the imagery of a devil woman buying bread from an insect guy is more than amusing enough for me.

 

[Remathilis]

Just to add. I used FATE as an example, and that was perhaps a poor choice on my point. The point I was trying to make is that there are lots of games out there where your character does start very loosely sketched in and it's during play that details start fleshing out the character. The characters grow organically from what is going on in the game itself.

D&D is something of a weird game in that players come to the table with fully fleshed out characters that are not necessarily linked in any meaningful way to the campaign at hand. Lots of games make fully fleshed out character - Traveler, GURPS, Vampire. But, unlike D&D, a lot of games that have you create fully fleshed out characters have very strongly presented settings. Your Vampire character is expected to be part of the Masquerade. The character comes from one of the clans. Those clans exist within the world that you are playing in. It's very difficult to create a Man with No Name character in Vampire because you automatically have a Sire, you belong to a group and you are living in the (kinda, sorta) real world.

D&D is something of the outlier here where you can make a character that is completely divorced from the setting, has zero connection to anything and everyone. And a lot of players seem to think that it's the DM's job to figure out how to pound square pegs into round holes, if they think about it at all.

It comes back to the fact that playing Vampire (or Cyberpunk or Star Wars) the setting is in the rulebook. It's really hard to design a character that doesn't either fit with the setting unless you are intentionally trying to be contrarian. But D&D? The fact it has no single setting but a dozen official ones (and countless homebrew ones) that not only is it impossible to put relevant lore in the PHB, you can't even be assured all the options in it are available! D&D by it's implicit design forces supplemental reading and DM/player collaboration just to understand what the game is going to be. No wonder players go their own way!

 

[Remathilis]

I mean, I appreciate the clarity of the response, but I just dont see the appeal. I find the direction post Tashas with species to be probably one of the worst aspects of 5/5.5.

It's ok. You're not supposed to. Everyone is different. I look at it the same way when people argue that X shouldn't be a class. You (editorial) may not see the utility in a separate barbarian class, but lots of other people do.

 

[Bae'zel]

This right here.

I was reading through the posts and thinking some folks expect a lot out of people carrying on a regular job and other commitments who just want to play a game of D&D. Many players do not think about their characters outside of the moment they sit down at the table. Those players sure aren’t going think about how they need to get into character and prepare to act out the right tropes.

I still just think the reason for players choosing weird species is both aesthetics and mechanics. Tieflings look cool. Elves are hot. They get cool abilities. It’s not a new phenomenon.

So many caveats are needed in these discussions.

Yes, absolutely, there are more casual games (beer & pretzels) where there is no overarching theme, plot or expectations of immersion.

I think we're talking more about the campaigns in which there ARE expectations of immersion and adherence to a certain theme, mood or setting.

I don't care if someone shows up to my Shadowdark or OSE game as a multi-species unicorn; the game is just a dungeon crawl of death. Their blood may be sparkly and uNiQUe, but it doesn't really matter.

If they insist on being a ninja anthro-cat girl with bat wings in my Lord of the RIngs campaign, they'll get some pushback from me.

 

[TiQuinn]

So many caveats are needed in these discussions.

Yes, absolutely, there are more casual games (beer & pretzels) where there is no overarching theme, plot or expectations of immersion.

I think we're talking more about the campaigns in which there ARE expectations of immersion and adherence to a certain theme, mood or setting.

I don't care if someone shows up to my Shadowdark or OSE game as a multi-species unicorn; the game is just a dungeon crawl of death. Their blood may be sparkly and uNiQUe, but it doesn't really matter.

If they insist on being a ninja anthro-cat girl with bat wings in my Lord of the RIngs campaign, they'll get some pushback from me.

My post after the one you quoted points to my thoughts on this. Players and DMs aren’t always going to align on the games they want to play for a variety of reasons, and either someone gives or they’ll have to wait for the right player or table. I get both sides.