Are your players usually ok with restrictions?

[Jhaelen]

Are players in your group ok with the DM putting restrictions on things like races, classes, or source books?

Yes. When I'm mastering a campaign I usually put restrictions on everything, including the selection of monsters I'm going to use.

The reason usually isn't that I'm worried about balance, it's about focusing on the campaign's theme. Imho, less is more in that regard.

Often, when we're several years into a campaign I remove some or all of the restrictions because at that point the players have a very good idea what is and what isn't appropriate for the campaign.

I'm also open-minded if a player wants to try something that requires restricted material. If I enjoy the character concept and the explanations are sound and rooted in roleplaying opportunities rather than powergaming, I make exceptions or make suggestions to implement the concept in ways that don't require restricted material.

 

[delericho]

I've never had a problem with a player due to a restriction I've imposed. Occasionally, I've had a player be disappointed to find they can't use a particular race/class/prestige class, but it's never been more than a momentary thing, and has never turned into a problem.

Maybe I've just been lucky.

 

[Dykstrav]

My current group doesn't have a problem with restrictions, but I've played with many, many people over the years for whom "restrictions" are a four-letter word.

When I restrict something, it's usually to fit the theme of the campaign. In a recent campaign, I've disallowed PC druids and discouraged barbarians because a nation of evil druids and barbarians were the campaign's major villain organization. I do have broad restrictions too though--for example, I don't have halflings in my homebrew setting. To me, they are just too Tolkien-esque. I also run games set in Greyhawk where everything goes, so the few people that want a chance to play halflings get it there.

"Restriction" is also a spectrum. I've played in games where the only allowed player resource was the core Player's Handbook and they have been just as fun as wide-open games. I've also seen groups where the players select whatever they want and they can be just as fun. I don't think that munchkinism is an inherent part of having character options... Although munchkins often do rush to use new supplements (probably to use the cool new stuff before it gets errata).

There are some players that rail against restrictions... But you can use that to your advantage. If no one wants to play a cleric, you can announce that clerics are restricted or banned and suddenly get four people clamoring to play one.

 

[Hellefire]

There are always some who complain about...pretty much anything.
I don't actually have a group right now, but most of the groups I have been a part of have been basically ok with restrictions - though I only really impose restrictions for theme games.

 

[Umbran]

Yep. My players are fine with restrictions.

A couple of them have even voiced the opinion that a real kitchen sink, a game played with *everything*, ends up less flavorful than one with a few well-chosen restrictions.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

Are players in your group ok with the DM putting restrictions on things like races, classes, or source books?

Yes; I've never had a problem with that.

 

[Nagol]

Are players in your group ok with the DM putting restrictions on things like races, classes, or source books? Or can it strike a nerve with someone and cause someone to complain about it?

Feel free to explain why or why not.

My players are always OK with any restrictons that are placed -- that's why they're playing. There have been times when a prospect has declined to play, but that's both rare and easily solutioned; there have always been more prospects than I care to run in a single game.

 

[FreeXenon]

What Mouseferatu said.

No probs if the restrictions are put together to reinforce a theme. Random arbitrariness for its sake would annoy me. A level of internal consistency is required.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Sometimes they are not ok.

One of our GMs, Chris, was setting up a 3e game with a pseudo-Roman period Germanic tribes setting. Only a few classes, all from the PHB, and very few races (only humans and half-elves) were allowed. We're used to no restrictions and one player, Ryan, wasn't happy with this. He's not a powergamer, but he likes to play monsters, and he also likes to change his PC every few sessions and try out the weirder classes from splatbooks, like the spellthief.

As a result the game never got off the ground.

 

[Piratecat]

My players are fine with restrictions. The important part is communicating them so that they don't feel like an arbitrary surprise.