D&D 5E DM imposed restrictions to the game (+)

[Emerikol]

I tend to run a fairly rich world and at times I include or exclude some races. I tend to have players who care about creating a character that fits in that world and is part of it. People who show up and immediately say they want to play and X,Y,Z multi-class A,B,C are typically poor fits for my game. And that is only a commentary on the kind of game I prefer and not on them.

So what I will allow or not allow varies. I did generally accept the original 3 core books though not sure I would these days if I played 5e. My answers are based on my experiences across all editions. I was always open to someone who could argue for something else reasonably. I never excluded something and later wished I hadn't but I've often allowed something and later regretted it.

 

[Umbran]

I don't run a single type of game, so I have no single answer for this.

Sometimes I will restrict some things, sometimes I will make no restrictions, or even build the world around what the players choose.

 

[GrimCo]

I didn't pick, since it's highly dependant on what i want to run. For some games, it's everything goes, pick, mix, match, enjoy. If i'm going for something thematic, then i might have very hard restrictions, as in, it's shorter to tell players what they can take rather than what they cannot. And anything in between.

 

[DragonLancer]

As someone just coming back to D&D with 2024, I have the following restrictions:

2024 books only and only if I own a copy, or you can bring a copy for me to look at first.
No 3PP books at all.
No evil alignments.

Saying that I have expanded the PHB races with Goblin, Sentinel (Warforged), Tabaxi and Kitsune for my own homebrew world.

 

[Baron Opal II]

My campaign is curated, so there is a specific list of races, changed classes, and specific sub-classes that are available. I'm pretty open handed with feats as I see those as a good mechanism for flavoring or personalizing a character. I'm getting pretty soured on multi-classing, and am strongly going the 4e route and making only "feat-based" multiclassing. I've thrown alignments out except in the cosmic sense.

That said, I am messing about with the Hexcrawl challenge, and have a much more open sort of game. The main restriction is that there are two races. The native humans, who all have the Lucky feat, and the Gatecrashers, who don't. If you are not a local you come through the anomalous metal structure way over that-a-way. You can be whatever you want in a published book or Tasha's method. But, you can't have the Lucky feat. Or, you grew up here from Gatecrasher parents. Also, all PCs, or PC equivalents, have visited the Temple of the King and have the Mark of Royalty. They can do amazing things like completely heal all wounds with a good night's sleep.

 

[JohnSnow]

My answer is: "It depends."

I just got persuaded to DM a game for a total newbie, her bestie and a few other friends. This is a full-on free-for-all game, because my excited newbie has been enticed to play after watching a totally gonzo Dungeons & Dragons liveplay show (Dimension 20's "Dungeons & Drag-Queens"), and I wouldn't want to disappoint her.

Sometimes, I try to keep it a bit more focused.

 

[bloodtide]

I'm an Anything Goes type of DM.

Of course I'm also a "as DM I can do anything" type DM who has no limits.

Game On!

 

[Ath'kethin]

I picked "some races" because I've run a handful of human-only campaigns.