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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Taking this a bit in reverse order because they are two wildly different things
The D&D beyond succubus is hardly the worst when DNDwiki stuff exists. Its maybe a bit strong but everything it has sort of fits into the general zeitgeist.
I don't care. A playable succubus is not ever going to be appropriate for my table. See that period?... I refused to even look at it and even players were giggling while telling the player to pick something else
Planescape: Torment had a succubus party member, of course that's gonna be on people's minds. Its just a generally popular option for that side of things, even before we get to Grace existing and being a succubus cleric
. this (IME) is par for the course where players who bought into the whole "tell your story" slogan as an evolution of the old rollplay vrs roleplay stuff are so blinkered to anything other than a tunnel vision focus on video game style mentality in play. Players at the bottom of that well often show up with overdeveloped PCs played as well flowers just waiting for their press x to pay respects custom crafted moment... D&d5e is worse for catering to it with such devotion for so long because they are so stuck on something nobody else cares about that they aren't actively doing things to craft those moments regularly. Unlike a video game or an on rails chain of one off standalone modules like the average 5e HC, my players have actual freedom of agency. It was not an exaggeration earlier when I said something like "you can do anything, you just need to figure out how to do it". That means that players are not limited to a choose your own adventure/video game style dialogue tree in ways that would make a video game succubus relevant in any way to why I simply refused to even entertain a topic like that player bringing up a playable succubus.

My refusal to entertain that particular discussion about someone playing a succubus is because it was an area where no compromise or half measure could be found. Without a possible compromise there was no reason for me to engage it in a way that could have helped that actual player play a succubus pc over just picking something else in the game he had already agreed to play. The resolution was such a non issue that I don't even remember what race/class he immediately chose



I'm talking a post event thing. 'Lizardmen' can be substituted for any non 'four humans, elves, dwarves and gnomes' race that the party helps out. You're not asking beforehand, you've done something to help them out in-game previously. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that one player's character has died and they're looking to reroll. They died helping out this town or village of something that isn't the stock 3.5e races. Doesn't matter what it is, just it isn't a stock 3.5e race. Could be anything. Lizardmen are just a common and simple enough option that are inoffensive. Could be a satyr. A centaur. Standard, regular races with a long history in the game

Does it not make more sense, from a storyline and player perspective, that one of those people they've helped come and join their adventurer, rather than "Oh, we went down the road and Fingus McHarfoot the halfling was there, guess we're having him come along rather than these people we helped"? Which one seems better to you, a character coming from player choices, or a new character just being quantum ogred into the next town or pathway because gotta meet up somehow?


We are specifically talking about a mid-game example where the party has already interacted with this village. They're already nearby Lizardfolk Village and have helped them in some manner. So, yeah, localisation isn't an issue
Races
Gnoll20%
Orc19%
Goblin18%
Shifter5%
Other races38%

Monstrous races as PCs is not an issue in my game, but not every monster is acceptable and not every interaction of that monster will fit eberron.

Races
Lizardfolk40%
Humans30%
Kobolds7%
Halflings7%
Dwarves3%
Half-elves2%
Other3%

The reason I mentioned qbarra is because a lizardman village is unlikely to be "nearby" unless the game is in or somehow involved with qbarra, which it normally is not. Nearly every region of khorvaire has some semi local or refugee population of oddball race that could fit that purposes of discussion example better & it doesn't matter because my inclination to strike it down has nothing to do with race, your example seems to describe a PC with too much first hand knowledge and string pulling capability into behind the curtain past and future unbuilt events for mid level game when my games tend to run up to mid to low teens. There's a difference between being from the region and having been in the room or directly involved in potentially quantum"storyline" events that happened behind the curtain and that difference really matters in unfun unfair ways that ultimately look like favoritism from the gm if it happens regularly. Sometimes I'll introduce NPCs and declare that one or more PCs already know them from some past interactions, but it's not appropriate for players to have a PC built so they can regularly do it themselves.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

I don't care. A playable succubus is not ever going to be appropriate for my table. See that period?... I refused to even look at it and even players were giggling while telling the player to pick something else
You'd hate World of Warcraft. Someone using some other race and calling themself actually a succubus is so commonplace at this point I don't even blink at it.

Monstrous races as PCs is not an issue in my game, but not every monster is acceptable and not every interaction of that monster will fit eberron.
Then I don't know why you've quoted so much irrelevant stuff in this one that's pointless to any discussion because it just comes down to... Cool, you agree with my point of "It makes more sense to allow monstrous races in parts rather than stick to the stock 3e options at all times"
 

Species isn't that important to a lot of people especially now that it's no longer tied to your ability score adjustments.
On the other hand, species decoupled from ASI has opened up people to try species they wouldn't have tried before. Especially for combos that would have been non-viable or even banned (things like minotaur druids to pick a nonreptilian example). Species has mostly become about aesthetics (with minor mechanical elements) and for some players, aesthetics is the biggest part of playing their character.
 

On the other hand, species decoupled from ASI has opened up people to try species they wouldn't have tried before. Especially for combos that would have been non-viable or even banned (things like minotaur druids to pick a nonreptilian example). Species has mostly become about aesthetics (with minor mechanical elements) and for some players, aesthetics is the biggest part of playing their character.

I never let it stop me from playing whatever I wanted, including things like a dwarven wizard. Not very optimized but I still had fun with it so now I kind of miss being able to play against type. I understand why they did it, it just makes species a bit more bland for me.
 

I never let it stop me from playing whatever I wanted, including things like a dwarven wizard. Not very optimized but I still had fun with it so now I kind of miss being able to play against type. I understand why they did it, it just makes species a bit more bland for me.
Not here to re-litigate the ASI thing, just pointing out that with Species (like alignment) having less mechanical impact, people are more likely to go with vibes rather than mechanics, which leads people to wanting to play a tiefling because they are red (or blue) devil people, rather than because they get +2 Cha and make good bards, warlocks and paladins.
 

I never let it stop me from playing whatever I wanted, including things like a dwarven wizard. Not very optimized but I still had fun with it so now I kind of miss being able to play against type. I understand why they did it, it just makes species a bit more bland for me.
Shhhh... That is a bad word. It was part of a HUGE debate in 2014 when it came to species ASIs. And even though it was referenced specifically from the PHB, people hated it. ;)
 

All right, how about we try anew to see where everyone is at.

Let's all close our eyes and pretend...

You meet someone at a game store.
Guy says: "Hey, I am new here. I play D&D."
Girl says: "Oh, cool. You know, we are starting a new campaign and need a player."
Guy says: "That's sounds awesome. What are you guys playing?"
Girl says: "We play D&D. We haven't switched to the new ruleset, so we still use 2014. Are you interested?"
Guy says: "Sure."
Girl says: "Sweet. We meet every Friday night at my friend's house."
Guy says: "Sounds cool. Is it close? Is your friend the DM?"
Girl says: "It is a few blocks away. And no, he doesn't DM. I do. Are you still interested?"
Guy says: Absolutely. I have been dying to play an in-person game since I moved here a year ago."

Fast forward 1 week for session zero.
Host says: "Welcome to my house. Whatever drink you see in the fridge is yours. And just to let you know, this is a laid-back table. We do some roleplaying in character, but most of the time it's just us describing what our character does. But we get along. We try to keep the fun in the forefront."
Guy says: "That sounds exactly like the game I came from. It sounds excellent. Thanks for inviting me. It really means a lot."
Girl says: "All right everyone. I can't wait to start a new campaign with everyone. I started on this a few months ago, and I am really proud of how it's coming about. Do you guys want a little background before making characters? I have some limitations."
Players, Host, and Guy: Nods yes
Girl says: "Well, I need everyone to stick to the PHB species from the 2014 rules. You can use Tasha's and Xanathar's and Sword Coast Adventures for extra spells, classes, species, etc. But that is it. I don't want Eberron or anything from a third-party source. Cool?"
Host says: "Sounds good."
Players say: "Sounds good. Just one question: Are you allowing the ASI from Tasha's."
Girl says: "Yup."
Guy says: "Can I play a tabaxi? I know they are not in those books, but I like cat-people and envision my character a cat."

Question: Based on the situation above, should the DM allow for the tabaxi?

A simple yes or no. That is all that is needed. It is not a trap, nor is it a gotchya. It is just to see where people are in this thread.
 

You'd hate World of Warcraft. Someone using some other race and calling themself actually a succubus is so commonplace at this point I don't even blink at it.


Then I don't know why you've quoted so much irrelevant stuff in this one that's pointless to any discussion because it just comes down to... Cool, you agree with my point of "It makes more sense to allow monstrous races in parts rather than stick to the stock 3e options at all times"
When your last attempt at using a video game to justify an exception to a hard no was dismissed as irrelivant alongside a description of why a laser like video game mentality is bad for d&d did you think that you just needed a video game with higher revenue and active players? It's still not relevant and the 5e video game mentality or bust design focus is still a terrible thing for d&d.

That kind of in one ear out the other with no attempt to process or react to gm setting/campaign curation brick wall is incredibly frustrating as a gm and wotc has spent years encouraging that exact attitude of dismissiveness in players
 

All right, how about we try anew to see where everyone is at.

Let's all close our eyes and pretend...

You meet someone at a game store.
Guy says: "Hey, I am new here. I play D&D."
Girl says: "Oh, cool. You know, we are starting a new campaign and need a player."
Guy says: "That's sounds awesome. What are you guys playing?"
Girl says: "We play D&D. We haven't switched to the new ruleset, so we still use 2014. Are you interested?"
Guy says: "Sure."
Girl says: "Sweet. We meet every Friday night at my friend's house."
Guy says: "Sounds cool. Is it close? Is your friend the DM?"
Girl says: "It is a few blocks away. And no, he doesn't DM. I do. Are you still interested?"
Guy says: Absolutely. I have been dying to play an in-person game since I moved here a year ago."

Fast forward 1 week for session zero.
Host says: "Welcome to my house. Whatever drink you see in the fridge is yours. And just to let you know, this is a laid-back table. We do some roleplaying in character, but most of the time it's just us describing what our character does. But we get along. We try to keep the fun in the forefront."
Guy says: "That sounds exactly like the game I came from. It sounds excellent. Thanks for inviting me. It really means a lot."
Girl says: "All right everyone. I can't wait to start a new campaign with everyone. I started on this a few months ago, and I am really proud of how it's coming about. Do you guys want a little background before making characters? I have some limitations."
Players, Host, and Guy: Nods yes
Girl says: "Well, I need everyone to stick to the PHB species from the 2014 rules. You can use Tasha's and Xanathar's and Sword Coast Adventures for extra spells, classes, species, etc. But that is it. I don't want Eberron or anything from a third-party source. Cool?"
Host says: "Sounds good."
Players say: "Sounds good. Just one question: Are you allowing the ASI from Tasha's."
Girl says: "Yup."
Guy says: "Can I play a tabaxi? I know they are not in those books, but I like cat-people and envision my character a cat."

Question: Based on the situation above, should the DM allow for the tabaxi?

A simple yes or no. That is all that is needed. It is not a trap, nor is it a gotchya. It is just to see where people are in this thread.

Why does your example assume the player is a complete random stranger?

Why does your example assume the GM is playing host?

Why is the GM's pitch so wafer-thin and yet apparently completely immovable?

Why have you skipped all possible discussion and context before a decision must be made?
 

Why does your example assume the player is a complete random stranger?

Why does your example assume the GM is playing host?

Why is the GM's pitch so wafer-thin and yet apparently completely immovable?

Why have you skipped all possible discussion and context before a decision must be made?
I think the GM and host are two different people in the example.

For me though, l can't say yes or no, depends on why the DM wants to exclude the other species not in the 3 mentioned books. I would hope in this case the DM would explain why not Tabaxi in particular, or allow them as they weren't intentionally excluded, just the book they are in as a whole excluded due to other options, and easier to start off by excluding them all than list one by one, until asked.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Enchanted Trinkets Complete

Remove ads

Top