DM's word is final... and illogical?

[TanisFrey]

The DM's ruling is final.

Wrong, you always have veto power. Of course it takes the form of feet shuffling off to a new gaming table.

 

[airwalkrr]

To the OP, yes the DM is allowed to do whatever he pleases when it is HIS campaign. In this case, I happen to suspect the DM has something cool and nifty in mind for your character in the future. Perhaps your character isn't a half-dragon now, but later...

Give the DM the benefit of the doubt. He is probably being cagey about it on purpose because he wants you to be surprised when you suddenly sprout wings or something.

From a purely genetic examination of the issue, assuming your parents' genes were 50% human and 50% dragon, it would be very unlikely, yet still theoretically possible for you to get 100% human genes out of that exchange. A more reasonable explanation is that perhaps you are 10% dragon and the human features are completely (at least the apparent ones) dominant.

 

[Empirate]

The very fact this thread got created hints at a trust issue, IMO. OP, you must decide whether you'll give your DM a chance and go along with whatever he comes up with, or if you want to retain complete control of your character. Either is fine. Just decide which one you want, or if you want something in between. E.g. you could decide your PC mechanics are your own, but you're open to background suggestions. Or you could decide this specific idea is silly and just not go along with it, but in other instances you might be prepared for a little DM intervention in your character concept. Or whatever.

Really, dude, it's your decision. Just make sure you communicate with your DM and explain yourself after you've made it. The DM is just another player at the table really, and one you do need to be able to trust. So if he's overstepping his boundaries, tell him. Make sure he understands that's how you feel about your character and about the game as a whole. DMs need power to do their job - but just how much power you're willing to give them is really your decision.

Of course, your DM might have different ideas. He might say "but I need more say over your PCs' backgrounds in order to develop a good story arc". He is (here comes the difficult part) also entitled to making that kind of decision.

If your views on things clash, work something out. Be nice and constructive about it. If you just can't be reconciled whatsoever, one of you must go (probably you, I'm sorry to say, but people willing to DM simply are rarer than guys willing to play).

That's the way social games work.

 

[Mark CMG]

Backgroundwise i do beleive that in general most of the player's just gave the DM details to incorperate into our background and let him create as he will.

This seems to be the crux of this particular campaign. I'd suggest just going with the flow and letting things play out since the DM seems to have something in mind to require such a set up. Or find another game as TanisFrey points out. And "yup" to the rest of the quotes below.

The very fact this thread got created hints at a trust issue, IMO. OP, you must decide whether you'll give your DM a chance and go along with whatever he comes up with, or if you want to retain complete control of your character.

To the OP, yes the DM is allowed to do whatever he pleases when it is HIS campaign. In this case, I happen to suspect the DM has something cool and nifty in mind for your character in the future. Perhaps your character isn't a half-dragon now, but later...

Give the DM the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Celebrim]

As another character in the same campaign i can attempt to clear up some of the questions at hand.

He's playing a level 10 Dragon Shaman...

Bingo. I would have nailed it in one except that I'm so used to playing by my rules I forgot about some of the expanded classes.

It seems to me that the DM is using this background to justify in game the character's abilities as a Dragon Shaman. Effectively he's saying, "Your power as a Dragon Shaman is how your character's heritage is manifesting itself." In this case, the characters class is his racial template. He's mostly human, but his heritage is slowly manifesting itself over time. Geneticly, to the extent such a thing has meaning in magical world, he's maybe 80% human. There is no need for additional templating or the like, and so far as I can tell the DM is not forcing additional templates on to the character. Instead, it seems the player is saying, "Look, you just gave me this cool background (fluff). Now, I want to get some mechanical advantage from it (crunch)." And I would guess that the DM was thinking, "Ok, the player has some cool crunch and a mysterious past. I need to think up some cool fluff that ties to the existing crunch.", and is now thinking, "Sheesh, why am I getting beat up on for not transforming the character into a +4 LA race. All I was doing was trying to add some story to the game."

Speaking as a DM, players arguing for mechanical advantage beyond what is on their sheet on the basis of their background is one of my pet peeves. It might not be as famous as "rules lawyering", but "story lawyering" is often just as annoying. Maybe its my natural inclination to defend any DM vs. any conflict with a player, but your DM may be brushing you off because anything that begins, "In my background it says [I've spent signficant time at sea/my parents are dragons/I'm been a tourist in Hell], shouldn't that apply in this particular favorable way in this particular situation?", makes me at least want to throw a book at a player.

 

[Mark CMG]

Speaking as a DM, players arguing for mechanical advantage beyond what is on their sheet on the basis of their background is one of my pet peeves. It might not be as famous as "rules lawyering", but "story lawyering" is often just as annoying.

I won't say that is what is happening here but the term I use for such behavior is "wheedling." It bugs me to the point of once having to boot a player over doing it incessantly.

 

[Empirate]

Celebrim, Mark CMG: I know exactly what you're talking about, yuck! That behaviour is worse than rules lawyering! "But I'm just trying to roleplay my character... "

Nevertheless, we shouldn't jump to conclusions about the OP's motivation here. He sounds just genuinely in search of advice and information.

 

[the Jester]

I have had my recent experiences with an a-hole DM, who more or less forced me to leave the group by banning my homebrews without proper explanations and even telling the whole group to go against them (the group itself had nothing against my works before, so I am sure he deliberately made them look bad)

Also, I would go with syber's suggestion of rolling the dice. And if you ask me, the DM has no right to neglect a player, especially when they have questions that would really need answers. And yes, a DM should admit his faults as well. That is where my DM failed, since my perfectly balanced homebrews (which didn't go against the campaign setting) were rejected with the sole reasoning of "because I am DM/because I can."

Wait wait wait- you think a dm is obligated to allow your homebrewed stuff into his campaign?

No sir, not one bit.

 

[Icyshadowlord]

I am not in the mood of starting an argument over the issues I had with my DM.

It had more to it than simply a clash of homebrews being allowed or not in the end. And you haven't really elaborated why the DM is not obligated to such. Because really, like I said, the group at first saw nothing wrong in it, and I even told the DM that I would to my best to make sure my homebrews could fit into the campaign.

Either way, like I said, I do not need to worry about that anymore, since I left that group and found a far nicer DM who actually appreciates my works and ideas. Now, going back to the topic, I sadly have to say that I don't have much to contribute as many others have brought out the best stuff concerning this topic already.

 

[JamesonCourage]

I am not in the mood of starting an argument over the issues I had with my DM.

It had more to it than simply a clash of homebrews being allowed or not in the end. And you haven't really elaborated why the DM is not obligated to such. Because really, like I said, the group at first saw nothing wrong in it, and I even told the DM that I would to my best to make sure my homebrews could fit into the campaign.

Either way, like I said, I do not need to worry about that anymore, since I left that group and found a far nicer DM who actually appreciates my works and ideas. Now, going back to the topic, I sadly have to say that I don't have much to contribute as many others have brought out the best stuff concerning this topic already.

If you don't want to get into an argument about something, I think it's exceptionally reasonable to state that opinion, and stick to it. I'd like to point out, as non-confrontationally and as diplomatically as I can, that to go on to defend yourself and question someone else's views is not a good way to go about that goal.

I agree with you, though. If you don't want to argue about it, let us all pay no particular attention to your specific details, accept your broader point, and discuss the OP's problem at hand.