Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="IceFractal" data-source="post: 4005394" data-attributes="member: 27704">I honestly don't see how a dinosaur is "more exotic" than a dragon.  But I don't think people would be so quick to decry the DM for not specifically mentioning dragons existed before using one.It's been said that what the DM should specifically mention are things that don't exist in the real world.  But guess what?  Orcs, elves, dwarves, lizardmen, kobolds, goblins, and so forth don't exist in the real world either.  But apparently they are "natural" to assume the existance of, whereas dinosaurs are some bizarre abberation.Again, I don't think that "things that exist in my concept of standard fantasy" is a good basis for what exists in the campaign world by default.   The concept of "standard fantasy" varies considerably between people, as this case proves.  The DM's idea of a normal D&D world includes dinosaurs.  The player's idea doesn't.  Maybe the DM should have mentioned that dinosaurs exist, but conversely, the player should have mentioned that they have a problem with things like dinosaurs existing.The DM has just as much right to say "yes, this thing is in my campaign", as they do to say "this thing isn't in my campaign".  If a player hated Elves and thought they were stupid, but never mentioned it, would you think they were justified in storming off when the DM let someone play an Elf?</blockquote>