D&D General Do players expect to use any/all WotC options in campaigns?

[AlViking]

No.

When Jeremy Crawford spoke about species, he spoke about having various racial archetypes. Most RPG settings have a set of them


Humans
Big Guys
Small Guys
Otherworldly Guys
Warrior Guys
Mage Guys
Evil or Ugly Guys

This is why when they removed Half Orc and humanized Orc, they added Golaith.


Middle Earth lacks a Big Guy. No Halforc, Minotairs, Kljngons, Cookies, or Krogans.

Still a circular argument. You need a big guy species to play a big guy because a big guy can only be played by a big guy species.

 

[tetrasodium]

5e gives you +2 to any race.

I'm at the gym just finished workout, recovery takes time

I want bonus carry cap, reach, better unarmed.

Something.

Obviously. But that's where the desire is instantly unworthy of being entertained as a result of not admitting it. Instead of saying that so an alternative could be found or considered for that you avoided the mechanical specifics and actual ask the hypothetical player wanted by cloaking the mechanical desire under RoLePlAyInG for pages of multiple posters asking u why various completely reasonable alternatives and compromises on the player's part aren't an option.

That's a completely unreasonable hole I take a long long time to forget a player digging themselves into when they ask for stuff down the line.

 

[GobHag]

I run games the way I do* because it's the best way I know how to run the game for the most players. A different DM may have a completely different set of criteria even to the point of allowing everything and anything.

Why can't people simply accept that as DMs we're just doing the best we can and leave it at that?

*Off the top of my head: I make the final call on rules, making rulings during the game for things I don't want to look up or for which there is no explicit rule, limit species, ban evil PCs and maintain control over world design.

I do accept it, I just think those DMs are wrong and will prefer if other people also see it that way.

 

[Remathilis]

All species mechanics in DnD are a bit half-assed IMO.

Always have been. Elves and half-elves have the same abilities (elves just have more/better ones at the cost of class options) and dwarves, gnomes and halflings all have overlapping abilities (slow, mining detection, infravision, bonuses to save vs magic and or poison, chance of magic item failure). And the half-orc has infravision. That's it's. Not surprising since Gary only begrudgingly even placed races in the game, so the idea that they would all have similar weak abilities and finicky offsets (ranging from trivial to crippling) fits his design ethos.

 

[AlViking]

I do accept it, I just think those DMs are wrong and will prefer if other people also see it that way.

Why do you feel entitled to tell me that I'm running my game wrong when you've never participated in a single session? Doesn't the fact that my players enjoy the game matter? Because part of the reason I've been told they enjoy my games is because I've put thought behind why things are the way they are, that my world has a unique feel and they appreciate the depth and history.

I may not be the DM for you. I've had DMs that others praised up and down but they just didn't click for me. You can say that without telling me that any DM that runs a game in a fashion you don't prefer is "wrong".

 

[Mecheon]

Boats sailed on Drow. Any race DM is using as hidden menace could be banned imho.

"Just a regular race that lives in the world and has cities and stuff" kind of doesn't work for a hidden menace. That's more cult side of things

So in order to be a big guy ... you can't just be a big guy? In order to have variety you need to have a variety of species because people in the real world aren't diverse enough? Any character I make is going to be fundamentally human because they are being run by a human. Mechanical bits and bobs do not define who my character is; I don't need to play a tabaxi to play Puss in Boots because Puss in Boots is just a human drawn as a cat.

Want someone big and brawny? They're above height for their particular species and have a high strength and con. There's no reason they have to be any particular species. One of my players is running a halfling barbarian who is big and brawny - for a halfling. She has a lot of fun with it. If a player can't imagine implementing a character type as anything other than a specific species I think that says more about the player than the restrictions implemented by a DM.

I mean, we can apply that to anything. Do we really need elves? Just be an agile person. Do we really need dwarves? Just be a miner. Do we really need halflings? Just be short

But, well, those clearly have differences from being a human. And likewise, D&D has had those options for decades. This isn't some new thing, new race options go back longer than I've been alive

Goliaths are half giants, a highly popular idea from mythology that has far more justification for being in the game than halflings. They tie into that 'taller than humans' vibe and idea, and, well, I shouldn't need to really mention how common giants are in the game. If you want to play characters inspired by the paladins of Charlamange, for example, just being a big dude isn't going to work out if you want a proper Fierabras. Or, heck, you just want some giant-esque beings a bit more easy to deal with and on people's level, goliaths work fine

Still a circular argument. You need a big guy species to play a big guy because a big guy can only be played by a big guy species.

Goliaths are half giants. Like, this isn't a new thing, in both editions where goliaths and half giants have co-existed they've had basically the same stats, and they go harder into it in 5.5e with the variants that are blatantly inspired by the bigger giants. Just being a human isn't going to work for being, you know, a giant-kin who has the blood of the cold north in their veins and can call upon it

Would you tell people to just play human if they wanted to play a half-elf?

 

[AlViking]

"Just a regular race that lives in the world and has cities and stuff" kind of doesn't work for a hidden menace. That's more cult side of things


I mean, we can apply that to anything. Do we really need elves? Just be an agile person. Do we really need dwarves? Just be a miner. Do we really need halflings? Just be short

But, well, those clearly have differences from being a human. And likewise, D&D has had those options for decades. This isn't some new thing, new race options go back longer than I've been alive

Goliaths are half giants, a highly popular idea from mythology that has far more justification for being in the game than halflings. They tie into that 'taller than humans' vibe and idea, and, well, I shouldn't need to really mention how common giants are in the game. If you want to play characters inspired by the paladins of Charlamange, for example, just being a big dude isn't going to work out if you want a proper Fierabras. Or, heck, you just want some giant-esque beings a bit more easy to deal with and on people's level, goliaths work fine


Goliaths are half giants. Like, this isn't a new thing, in both editions where goliaths and half giants have co-existed they've had basically the same stats, and they go harder into it in 5.5e with the variants that are blatantly inspired by the bigger giants. Just being a human isn't going to work for being, you know, a giant-kin who has the blood of the cold north in their veins and can call upon it

Would you tell people to just play human if they wanted to play a half-elf?

I could also want to play a Kryptonian. Since I can't I'll choose something else. There's still no "reason" here other than "I want to". Since I'm the DM I get to say there's no place for them in my campaign world, if you want to play generic fantasy land with so many options it all blurs together play a Forgotten Realms game. I do now and then and it's fine I suppose.

Sounds like I'm not the DM for you. I'd rather run a world where species means something, where distinct and unique cultures mean more than trying to fit in every archetype imaginable that just becomes a human with a handful of mechanical bits and bobs added on.

Fortunately my players enjoy my game and we all have fun playing. That, to me, is all that matters.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Yes, if I curate a race for a reason I need to inform the players so that they don't pick that race.

If I have elves vanish 10,000 years ago and not one has been seen since for reasons, if you have the only elf your PC will drastically change the world simply by existing. That's a major disruption to the game, and no player has the right to expect to be able to disrupt the game.

How is it automatically or necessarily a drastic change to the world? How or why does the world know that there isnt a tiny pocket of like 60 elves i a hidden vale somewhere? The players certainly don't.

Not only that, but you can also just curate after character creation but before session 1.

And if someone makes an elf pc mid campaign, with no idea for engaging with the "extinction of the elves" world state, that is a disruptive player, sure. But there are always ways to have "unique" individuals around who underscore the worldbuilding by way of being the sole known exception.

 

[AlViking]

How is it automatically or necessarily a drastic change to the world? How or why does the world know that there isnt a tiny pocket of like 60 elves i a hidden vale somewhere? The players certainly don't.

Not only that, but you can also just curate after character creation but before session 1.

And if someone makes an elf pc mid campaign, with no idea for engaging with the "extinction of the elves" world state, that is a disruptive player, sure. But there are always ways to have "unique" individuals around who underscore the worldbuilding by way of being the sole known exception.

So the loop continues:
1. "I don't do it because <insert reasons>"
2. "You can always do it my way."
3. Go to #1.

We know we could do it your way. We have reasons not to. What else is there to say since this is the zillionth time this argument has been repeated?

 

[Minigiant]

Who says? That's a DM choice, not a system choice.

The original discussion was about Middle Earth's unaltered curation of options has Big Guys and nonmartials missing.