L
lowkey13
Guest
*Deleted by user*
D&D 5E (2014) Enforcing theme/structure by saying NO to players
- Thread starter Gnashtooth
- Start date
GMforPowergamers
Legend
I do heavy restrictions, and I have had players come up with some really off the wall ideas. However every game I run is very different so if you have an idea for a draw assassin when I want to run knights of the round table, I normally just go with "Play that next time" sometimes when 2 or more players have crazy wont work now ideas I take those two ideas and make a world around it for my next campaign...
Example: I ran a steampunk D&D game during my Tuesday night game and at the same time was running a Dresden files like game on every other saterday... one of the players playing in both pitched the same concept for both "I want to be a dragonborn warlock of Tiamat... it didn't work so well with either game, but the saterday night crew had a guy who wanted to play a vampire... and well I could have gotten it to work I asked him to hold it till the next game and made a 'bad guys but not really evil/suicide squad' campaign working for a LN adamantine dragon... it was pretty cool
S
Sunseeker
Guest
Yes, but I won't run a campaign if there's not enough buy-in. If Bob is always the odd-man-out, he might be better suited for a different table (assuming you play nothing other than DL games). However, it is also reasonable to say that if Bob is your friend, you might want to run a more open-styled game, or encourage him to do so.
If I were to run a game with restricted races, classes or settings, I'll tell everyone up-front. If they're not down, we can do something else. But don't use other-player buy-in to shut down Bob's desire for "special" stuff. The table isn't a democracy. Getting player buy-in is important for the game, but in the end its still the DM who makes the call. Work something out with Bob.
I don't like Dragonlance, so if I were at your table, I'd probably just walk, otherwise I'd turn into a Kender-killer. If Bob really doesn't like your restrictions, he can walk too.
If I were to run a game with restricted races, classes or settings, I'll tell everyone up-front. If they're not down, we can do something else. But don't use other-player buy-in to shut down Bob's desire for "special" stuff. The table isn't a democracy. Getting player buy-in is important for the game, but in the end its still the DM who makes the call. Work something out with Bob.
I don't like Dragonlance, so if I were at your table, I'd probably just walk, otherwise I'd turn into a Kender-killer. If Bob really doesn't like your restrictions, he can walk too.
fuindordm
Adventurer
Strongly themed campaigns are a challenge for a number of reasons. When I want to run one, I:
1. Write a one-page proposal, including restrictions, and ask who's interested in playing.
2. (after I have some players) Write a slightly longer campaign guide and give incentives for building PCs on theme.
3. Run a "session zero" for character creation where I can talk about the story and the world to players as they make their characters.
4. Expect a bit of cycling in/out of players over the first few games, as word spreads or people decide it's not their thing.
5. Enjoy a stable campaign!
A themed campaign can easily handle one player who insists on being the odd one out, as long as you enjoy that person's company. I have no problem with one of those in a party. But if I reached step 3 and everyone were making vikings and samurai for an Arabian Nights game, then I would abort the game and say "OK, it seems like the campaign isn't really grabbing people. What do you want to play instead?"
1. Write a one-page proposal, including restrictions, and ask who's interested in playing.
2. (after I have some players) Write a slightly longer campaign guide and give incentives for building PCs on theme.
3. Run a "session zero" for character creation where I can talk about the story and the world to players as they make their characters.
4. Expect a bit of cycling in/out of players over the first few games, as word spreads or people decide it's not their thing.
5. Enjoy a stable campaign!
A themed campaign can easily handle one player who insists on being the odd one out, as long as you enjoy that person's company. I have no problem with one of those in a party. But if I reached step 3 and everyone were making vikings and samurai for an Arabian Nights game, then I would abort the game and say "OK, it seems like the campaign isn't really grabbing people. What do you want to play instead?"
practicalm
Adventurer
I've been running more open games at my church and when I fill in on AL nights at my local game store. So I haven't minded most of the player ideas.
When I run less open games, I try to take a page from someone from the old Pyramid boards and do a summary of the campaign and let people apply to get in. If someone cannot make a character that fits in to the world I'm interested in running they can find a different game. To be fair I usually write up 3-5 summaries and ask which ones are the most interesting and then run the games that are the most popular.
When I run less open games, I try to take a page from someone from the old Pyramid boards and do a summary of the campaign and let people apply to get in. If someone cannot make a character that fits in to the world I'm interested in running they can find a different game. To be fair I usually write up 3-5 summaries and ask which ones are the most interesting and then run the games that are the most popular.
Not anymore. I'm at a glorious stage of my life where I can game with people I want to, not people I have to.
My advice:
Explain to the player WHY said options are not allowed. Give story and mechanical reasons, if needed. If this doesn't work, or if the player is just an obstructionist in general, boot the player from the game. You and the others don't need the headache, and the player is probably better off finding a group that is more compatible with his preferences anyway.
AaronOfBarbaria
Adventurer
Nope.
I think, however, that the easiest way to understand the reason why I don't have players make those complaints is to read what is written about Dragonborn (and similiar things are written about other races) in my guide to the Mystara campaign setting my campaigns use. To summarize: This race is not native to Mystara, but can be used to represent a progeny character with draconic heritage (a human with enough dragon in their ancestry to look different and have different traits) but such character must originally hail from Glantri and is encourage to be a sorcerer if a spellcaster at all. Alternatively, an actual dragonborn could be played as a native of another world visiting Mystara.
MoonSong
Rules-lawyering drama queen but not a munchkin
This reminds me of a certain thread form lsat year
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...ower-of-quot-NO-quot-Banned-Races-and-Classes
I think I can live with some restrictions, but if it comes to the point where you are saying no more often than not, it could be a good time to consider saying yes.
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...ower-of-quot-NO-quot-Banned-Races-and-Classes
I think I can live with some restrictions, but if it comes to the point where you are saying no more often than not, it could be a good time to consider saying yes.
GX.Sigma
Adventurer
The best solution I've thought up (and one I plan to use in the future) is to let the players know that while your game is loosely based on ideas presented in these rulebooks, and will use the rules therein as long as they are convenient, you are not running the game designed by Mearls, Crawford, et al. You are running a game designed by you. The rulebooks don't define what is possible in the game--you do. ("You" being either the GM, or some kind of hive-mind of everyone at the table.)
Mercule
Adventurer
It depends. If we're doing "beer & pretzels"*, then I don't really worry about it. For games like this, I'm open to crafting a whole new world around whatever the players decide to throw together, though it generally defaults to my home brew or Eberron. My only restrictions are: 1) don't try something that breaks the system, 2) the characters (usually) have to be reasonably balanced against one another, and 3) don't make getting the party together a pain -- after 30 years of GMing, I will exclude your prima donna buttocks and pay attention to the largest group of PCs that actually do something. Additionally, if you agree to play in an established setting, regardless of whether that's a published setting like Eberron or my decades-old home brew, you're implicitly agreeing to abide by the restrictions that have already been established for those worlds (no Harpers in Eberron and no halflings in my setting).
If I have an idea that really moves me, and want to do a campaign around it, the group either buys in or not. At this point in my life, "the group" is somewhat fluid. If there aren't enough takers, then I decide whether I want to pitch another concept game, play beer & pretzels, or pass on GMing.
*never literally, since two of the players are tea-totallers and my wife is Celiac
If I have an idea that really moves me, and want to do a campaign around it, the group either buys in or not. At this point in my life, "the group" is somewhat fluid. If there aren't enough takers, then I decide whether I want to pitch another concept game, play beer & pretzels, or pass on GMing.
*never literally, since two of the players are tea-totallers and my wife is Celiac
