D&D General The Monsters Know What They're Doing ... Are Unsure on 5e24

[Maxperson]

I mean, would you believe me if I told you that folks have done it and found it to be not only not "completely opposed to a themed setting" but actually helped enhance the themed setting?

I'm specifically thinking here of a GM who had a player that wanted to play a Shardmind (4e psionic rock people race) in Athas. Per the GM's own words (all emphasis in original):

Case in point: I dislike the shardmind race out of 4E. I get what they are supposed to be and all, but they just really aren't to my taste. Had a player who wanted to play a shardmind bard in my Dark Sun game. I said, "Well, I don't necessarily see a place for shardminds on Athas. How do you see your character fitting in?" His reply was, "I don't know. I just want him to wake up in the desert, with no memory of where he came from. And he looks to be made of obsidian. You have carte blanche to come up with a background for him."​

BAM! Not only did that give me, the DM plenty of leeway to work the character in, but gave me a hell of a hook for the campaign, too. I couldnt picture how Arshaka the Obsidian Bard would fit in the campaign at first. Now I couldn't picture it without him. That's the power of saying "yes" instead of "not in MY game."​

Now, obviously, these are bespoke solutions to bespoke problems. There is not, cannot be, and should not be, one size that fits all. It needs to be worked out between each GM and player, each and every time. Nothing less will do. But my point, as said at the start, was that things are more complicated than just "nope that contradicts the setting, not possible". Fiction is a deep, deep well. It behooves us to remember that when we claim anything is impossible within the realm of fiction.

I would have also allowed it, but probably asked him to pick something other than obsidian. The Obsidian Man of Urik was unique and his choice of materials would likely set a sorcerer-kings full resources on his capture, as well as mark him as a target for many others who have heard that story.

 

[Zardnaar]

I would have also allowed it, but probably asked him to pick something other than obsidian. The Obsidian Man of Urik was unique and his choice of materials would likely set a sorcerer-kings full resources on his capture, as well as mark him as a target for many others who have heard that story.

At least shardmind isn't completely inappropriate for DS. My biggest is the living construct part which I dont think belongs on Athas (ignores breathing and food/water requirements).

At low levels I want the environment to matter/deplete resources.

 

[DinoInDisguise]

“because my world building is more important than making the game fun”

I think this line is odd.

If this were true, half of this thread wouldn't have both restrictions due to world building and long standing players. The existence and longevity of those groups suggests their methods work. It suggests your statement here is not true for them.

The real answer here seems to be, that some DMs believe their world building is worth being selective with their players. Meaning some are more willing to lose some number of potential players to raise their own fun. Players do this all the time in reverse, when they don't play with just any DM for various reasons.

So I dont get this "DMs value worldbuilding over fun." The only way it appears true, is if we alter it to, "DMs value worldbuilding over my fun" but at that point it's absurd. A DM's priority should always be the fun of the people at their table, not the abstract fun of internet theorists.

But maybe this line is a mirage, and the actual argument isn't "wrong fun." Maybe the argument is DMs shouldn't be allowed to shop for players, like players do for DMs. They should have to take any and all comers; should have to appeal to as many as possible.

Or maybe the argument is that any DM who is world building is just making this hobby worse, and we should just ostracize them from the community.

Personally, I think we should stop telling others they are playing wrong. But maybe I'm wrong. I know I'm confused why this line keeps coming up.

 

[Bae'zel]

In fairness, "half-cat person, half-vampire ninja" is just an exaggerated version of Carmilla from the 1872 Gothic novella of the same name. (Vampire? Check. Turns into a cat? Check. Explicity uses martial arts? Check.) So at least the player is proposing a character inspired by the horror genre as it existed during Lovecraft's lifetime.

If the player wasn't citing Anime as a source of inspiration, but a Victorian novella, I'd be more lenient for sure.

Sadly, in my experience, when ninja cat girl vampires are concerned, it's usually from Anime.

 

[Zardnaar]

I think this line is odd.

If this were true, half of this thread wouldn't have both restrictions due to world building and long standing players. The existence and longevity of those groups suggests their methods work. It suggests your statement here is not true for them.

The real answer here seems to be, that some DMs believe their world building is worth being selective with their players. Meaning some are more willing to lose some number of potential players to raise their own fun. Players do this all the time in reverse, when they don't play with just any DM for various reasons.

So I dont get this "DMs value worldbuilding over fun." The only way it appears true, is if we alter it to, "DMs value worldbuilding over my fun" but at that point it's absurd. A DM's priority should always be the fun of the people at their table, not the abstract fun of internet theorists.

But maybe this line is a mirage, and the actual argument isn't "wrong fun." Maybe the argument is DMs shouldn't be allowed to shop for players, like players do for DMs. They should have to take any and all comers; should have to appeal to as many as possible.

Or maybe the argument is that any DM who is world building is just making this hobby worse, and we should just ostracize them from the community.

Personally, I think we should stop telling others they are playing wrong. But maybe I'm wrong.

I filter for players. I'll run a starter set or whatever and the players we like the best get the campaign invites.

Unreliable or annoying/disruptive/smelly ones get filtered out. I dont care about skill levels, beliefs, etc unless it effects others at the table.

 

[Maxperson]

• I do limit patrons for warlocks for a variety of reasons.
  • If you select one from the list the patron is not going away.
  • I don't allow making a deal with a devil because you will eventually be asked to do something evil. Why else would the devil make the deal?

The standard one is because the devil gets the PCs soul when he dies or after X amount of time. A warlock pact could include requirements to do evil or as the devil asks, or it might not and just include things like, "You can't harm or work against a devil. You must try and kill demons. I get your soul when you die or 100 years has passed, whichever comes first. And so on. It's pretty easy to get a deal with a devil that doesn't include being/doing evil.

 

[Maxperson]

At least shardmind isn't completely inappropriate for DS. My biggest is the living construct part which I dont think belongs on Athas (ignores breathing and food/water requirements).

At low levels I want the environment to matter/deplete resources.

That's a case by case thing. There are other resources that are still minimal, and not all Dark Sun games are about hunger and thirst at low levels. That's fun the first few times you play it, but it gets old after a while. It doesn't go away, but it's not central to the game, either, so a living construct can and would fit right in. Especially since the Obsidian Man of Urik is a thing. We know they are on Athas.

 

[Maxperson]

At a certain point, why not just be upfront and say "I'm trying to curate a specific aesthetic for this game?"

Because the fact that you're opposed to the look of the tortle more than anything tells me that maintaining the mental image of the setting is what's most important to you.

It's D&D, everything on both sides is about the mental image of the setting. With unusual racial appearances like cat man, turtle man and elephant man, it's more about how the setting will bend around and react to this new solitary being. What impact/disruption will it have on the game. If too much, something has to change(compromise or denial). If not too much, then the answer is yes.

 

[AlViking]

I’ve already suggested several. I am a natural turtle changed my magic, I am from another plane of existence, I was a spelljammer until my ship crashed, I have no memory an no one knows what I am, now I am on a quest to discover the truth, I am a human part-transformed into a turtle by magic, I am a lizard man with a skin condition, I’m a dragonturtle Dragonborn etc.

Is there? Says who? Oh yes, you.

No, I can’t answer because I don’t actually want to play a tortle (or anything else in your game judging by your attitude). But it’s easy for anyone to see that your suggestion is not serious, and is simply intended to humiliate the player.

Your "compromise" is let the player play ... wait for it ... a TORTLE!!!! Like I said above.

That's not compromise, it's not a conversation. It's the player gets to decide no matter what the DM says or why the DM doesn't allow them. Which, if that works for you campaign, great. It doesn't for mine.

 

[Remathilis]

I don't want dozens of intelligent humanoid "monsters" running around for the same reason I don't want dozens of playable species. As far as beasts, monstrosities and what not that's a bit of a different story. If I want to use a monster that doesn't suit the theme of a specific scenario I just describe it as creature that makes sense.

Creativity doesn't come from using a variety of monsters from a book. It comes from how you use those monsters and, for me, figuring out how they fit into my scenarios.

I will give you credit then. You are devoted to your vision and not simply interested in limiting PC options while keeping all your DM toys available. A rarity in this space. It takes a lot of willpower to ignore the latest player book AND monster manual.