All right, first post on EnWorld. Anyways, I play D&D through yahoo messenger (via conference) and tabletop. My tabletop game is mostly a new group, only 1 person other than myself has had previous experience but the online group is substantially larger and everybody has had their own experiences. There are about 5 or 6 GM's total who run regularly and close to 30 players. Naturally there is a lot of intermingling in games. Many of the games are overrun with monster races and min-maxing. As somebody who started with AD&D (only 5 years ago, my group was behind the trend) I have always had a bit of a thing against the monster races and min/maxing that seems so common. For a game that hits level 10 its not uncommon to see 5 base classes and/or prestige classes on one character. Many people have been playing for years and are experimenting, which I can understand. But the thing that torks me off most is that it seems that I'm becoming a minority in the fact that if you play a drow, expect to be run out of town with spears being poked into your hindquarters, if you play a tiefling, expect to be distrusted if not outright hated because you have horns and goats feet. Problem is, I'm the only DM out of the group who enforces this. The players say that the commoners shouldn't act that way and that they would know about such races and how they CAN be good. I respond by saying that all the commoners and guards know is stories told by a gleeman at the local fair or a wandering minstrel about evil dark skinned elves and fiends with horns, fiery eyes and hooves who destroy towns. They seem to think that such creatures are fairly common while I say that they aren't. Unfortunately, its about a 20 to 1 fight and I'm not egotistical enough to believe I can't be wrong (though acording to society the fact that I'm 18 makes me naturally egotistical). Am I right? Am I wrong? Should I fight this? Should I just create a campaign setting that allows this so I don't start loosing players? Is normal D&D already set up for this? Please help
Argument with the players
- Thread starter 0bsolete
- Start date
freyar
Extradimensional Explorer
To keep things short and simple, I'd just say this: each campaign world should run how the DM wants to run it. If the players don't like it, they don't need to play, but you as a DM need to be satisfied with how the game runs (which may or may not mean you need to find more players).
Also, I think your position is a lot more in line with the "core assumptions" of 3e D&D, FWIW. Not sure that will quite be true or not in 4e, though.
Also, I think your position is a lot more in line with the "core assumptions" of 3e D&D, FWIW. Not sure that will quite be true or not in 4e, though.
Doug Sundseth
First Post
You're not wrong to have a world that reacts in horror to the sort of freak-show PCs you describe. You would also not be wrong to require that all the players play itinerant outcasts from a gnomish monastery. (Which, come to think of it.... 
That said, if you are going to be running a world that contravenes the known expectations of your players, it's only polite to make sure that the players understand that before they join the game. If you make that clear and the players decide to play, they have no reason to complain.
If they won't play, you'll need to decide whether to modify the concept, find new players, or drop the idea of GMing.
That said, if you are going to be running a world that contravenes the known expectations of your players, it's only polite to make sure that the players understand that before they join the game. If you make that clear and the players decide to play, they have no reason to complain.
If they won't play, you'll need to decide whether to modify the concept, find new players, or drop the idea of GMing.
Aus_Snow
First Post
Unless it is really simply abhorrent to even contemplate the prospect, how about running one of each type? That is, run something more in line with your preferences for fantasy worlds for one group, and something appropriately high-magic and high-power for another?
For the high-magic world, it might indeed be quite normal to have every man and his dog be part fiend/fey/angel, or whatever strikes the fancy. If you run with it, that could even be fun.
Not knowing any of your tabletop or online group members though, I kno pretty much nothing. :\ So definitely, take anything I say with a healthy dose of salt. Of course.
For the high-magic world, it might indeed be quite normal to have every man and his dog be part fiend/fey/angel, or whatever strikes the fancy. If you run with it, that could even be fun.
Not knowing any of your tabletop or online group members though, I kno pretty much nothing. :\ So definitely, take anything I say with a healthy dose of salt. Of course.
Treebore
First Post
Run it how your comfortable with. If you can't find players who like your concept don't DM.
It may take time, but you'll find players who can accept the way you see things.
I find it extremely funny that people claim to know how a fake world works when they don't even know how the real world works.
It may take time, but you'll find players who can accept the way you see things.
I find it extremely funny that people claim to know how a fake world works when they don't even know how the real world works.
SavageRobby
First Post
There is no "right or wrong" here. Just preference. Is the world you're running in a shared world? Do the other DMs run in that world as well?
If so, then you definitely have to be aware of the preconceptions of that world, and it would be best to adhere to them. Suddenly switching what has amounted to canon for a game world is typically considered bad form.
However, if you're running in a game world of your own making ... then you can design it how you want. The most important thing in that case is communicating it clearly and upfront to your players, especially if they're used to something else (as apparently they are). Write up a little one page deal about how you see your game world. Is it dominated by the standard Tolkien-ish races, and are the other races looked on with great hostility and suspicion? Make sure to include that fact.
If so, then you definitely have to be aware of the preconceptions of that world, and it would be best to adhere to them. Suddenly switching what has amounted to canon for a game world is typically considered bad form.
However, if you're running in a game world of your own making ... then you can design it how you want. The most important thing in that case is communicating it clearly and upfront to your players, especially if they're used to something else (as apparently they are). Write up a little one page deal about how you see your game world. Is it dominated by the standard Tolkien-ish races, and are the other races looked on with great hostility and suspicion? Make sure to include that fact.
Whisper72
Explorer
Well, as another poster said, it is important to set out the ground rules ahead of time. When starting your campaign, make it clear to ppl who want to join what the atmosphere / style of the campaign world, the type of expecte adventures is, maybe even put simple limits on what the players may do/chose in terms of classes etc.
Personally, I also abhor such types of characters, and ground rules for my campaign would be, no non-standard (MY standard) races, unless someone can convince me otherwise, and in so convincing me, I will make it clear to the payer what the consequences will be for the PC.
Similar with classes. As a DM, I decide in my games when PC's can multiclass, and to which classes it is logical / possible to multiclass into. This depends upon the greater game world, and the current place the PC's are in.
Personally, I also abhor such types of characters, and ground rules for my campaign would be, no non-standard (MY standard) races, unless someone can convince me otherwise, and in so convincing me, I will make it clear to the payer what the consequences will be for the PC.
Similar with classes. As a DM, I decide in my games when PC's can multiclass, and to which classes it is logical / possible to multiclass into. This depends upon the greater game world, and the current place the PC's are in.
werk
First Post
Always before, when I've run monstous characters in my campaign, it was a campaign designed to accomodate them. But in most of my games, if a pack of monsters wandered into an isolated little human village they'd have some 'splaining to do.
Is your world status quo or tailored? If status quo, get out your pitchforks and warm up the burnin' stake. If tailored, I'm surprised the PCs aren't running the town yet. It's the difference between scarey-looking freaks invading town and magical, exotic beings come to help in our hour of need.
I think it depends on variables that we usually decide before beginning play as a DM.
If you are status quo, and the players want tailored (and what player doesn't?) then someone will need to compromise.
Is your world status quo or tailored? If status quo, get out your pitchforks and warm up the burnin' stake. If tailored, I'm surprised the PCs aren't running the town yet. It's the difference between scarey-looking freaks invading town and magical, exotic beings come to help in our hour of need.
I think it depends on variables that we usually decide before beginning play as a DM.
If you are status quo, and the players want tailored (and what player doesn't?) then someone will need to compromise.
Asmor
First Post
I'd recommend a compromise... Suggest that the players take steps to hide their race (baggy clothing, cloaks, big hoods that cloak the face in shadow... You know, standard adventuring attire they probably already have ) and in return you'll just hand wave any spot checks and say that, except for extenuating circumstances, people don't notice their race.
That way the players get to play their freaks and you get to have your verisimilitude. Win-win. Plus, it could open up some good plots... For example, the drow PC saves a child, all the town gathers around cheering him, he tries to get away, they insist that he be their guest, they want to see the face of the man who saved the child, someone pulls back the hood and... all hell breaks loose. There's some good role playing opportunity.
) and in return you'll just hand wave any spot checks and say that, except for extenuating circumstances, people don't notice their race.That way the players get to play their freaks and you get to have your verisimilitude. Win-win. Plus, it could open up some good plots... For example, the drow PC saves a child, all the town gathers around cheering him, he tries to get away, they insist that he be their guest, they want to see the face of the man who saved the child, someone pulls back the hood and... all hell breaks loose. There's some good role playing opportunity.
0bsolete said:
Seems to me that you and your players are both arguing against yourselves.
If such creatures are common, then folks are going to know that the majority of them are evil and treat them as such. None of this "can be good" nonsense. So can an orc, but that doesn't mean folks will want an orc hanging around.
Yet if such creatures are rare and few people know much about them, then I would express less prejudice, not more.
