D&D General D&D Evolutions You Like and Dislike [+]

[Maxperson]

Nothing in the D&D rules suggests that Dragonblood has such power. If in your campaign they have, maybe then the Dragonborns are just a species that happens to be dragonlike. Maybe they're pseudodragon-blooded, or they came into existence merely because of lesser species existing in the vicinity of dragon, kinda a mutation from the power radiating from dragons. Maybe the Gods actually cursed the Dragonborn to be that weak, because the Dragons overstepped when they created their own servant species, but they didn't feel - or fear - going against the Dragon themselves.

Meh, here I am again, trying to explain people how to use some imagination to find solutions for imaginary players in imaginary campaigns...

---

I agree that I like that D&D both in game rules and among the community talks more directly about how to deal with common "social" issues, like disruptive players or GMs, settling the bounds of what people are okay for topics and what they can't stomache.

Yes, it's how I view dragons and dragon blood. And I'm fully capable of imagining anything. It's not about being able to imagine a justification for weak dragonborn. It's that such justifications fall short of how I view dragons. The game is Dungeons and Dragons. I've always felt that dragons were weaker than they should be in most of the editions. 3e came very close, though.

 

[mamba]

Meh, here I am again, trying to explain people how to use some imagination to find solutions for imaginary players in imaginary campaigns...

not that you needed to…

Now the original mechanics for dragonborn are just sitting in the PHB not really attached to anything. If someone wanted to make up a new non-dragonish race that used those mechanics, I'd be game to come up with something with them.

 

[Lanefan]

Every game has totally new players? You don't keep the same players from campaign to campaign?

Last time I changed over campaigns the previous one finished with 10 players (in two groups run on different nights). The new one, considerably and intentionally pared down, started with 4 players, 2 of whom were brand new to our crew. As the game went on we took in more players, while some left (and then returned); there's been 14 in total over the years with a high point of 8 at once (again in two groups on different nights). Right now it's back down to 4, only one of whom was in the original 4; and he was out for something like 8 years before returning in 2024.

A good analogy here would be the turnover of members in a long-running band such as Yes or Deep Purple.

I'm just asking because if I was to infer from the comments on this board, most DMs design a campaign world for themselves and allow options that they would also be willing to play, creating a game completely centered on their own tastes and no thought is given to the players.

I kinda take it as a given that most DMs (if not running completely stock e.g. AL play) are in large part developing and running a game or style that, if someone else ran it, they'd like to play in. This to me isn't controversial in the slightest.

Akin to inviting people over to a party and serving only your favorite foods and hoping the other guests have the same food preferences as you (or will just suffer in silence if they don't).

Easily solved by having people bring their own snacks if they so desire.

 

[Lanefan]

I mean, if I was designing a setting without knowing who the players were (I wouldn't, but hypothetically), I would make the setting as open and approachable as possible.

Where I'll design the setting I want to run and if others are interested enough to play in it, good. If not, clearly I've done it wrong and need to start over.

Dragging this, kicking and screaming, back to the thread's original topic, this is one evolution I'm not all that keen on: the slow steady transfer of setting control from DMs over to players*. The setting, game world, etc. started out as completely+ within the DM's purview; he could fairly freely choose what to include or leave out. Now, there seems to be much more of an expectation that the DM is supposed to bend the setting to suit the players' tastes-preferences-whims even if-when doing so goes against what the DM would prefer to run.

* - some indie games have dialled this process to 11, for better or (IMO) worse.
+ - the stronghold-building rules in the 1e DMG notwithstanding, before anyone brings that up.

 

[Remathilis]

Easily solved by having people bring their own snacks if they so desire.

Remind me not to come to your parties, they're byof!