GM Authority (Edited For Clarity, Post #148)

[Aldarc]

You could. Why you would bother designing an entire game when you could just add a couple house-rules to an existing one is a question for the individual.

No, a guy who hears GoT and wants an Elf is not an asset.

What I heard was a GM making a pitch saying that they wanted to run something inspired by GoT. Considering that Birthright has elves, I don't think that it's necessarily out of the ordinary for a player to propose playing an elf. If the GM initially used phrasing like "all human campaign" instead of "regular people," then they likely could have nipped this player's idea in the bud at the outset.

 

[Crusadius]

What I heard was a GM making a pitch saying that they wanted to run something inspired by GoT. Considering that Birthright has elves, I don't think that it's necessarily out of the ordinary for a player to propose playing an elf. If the GM initially used phrasing like "all human campaign" instead of "regular people," then they likely could have nipped this player's idea in the bud at the outset.

Even if the Player initially misinterpreted the campaign's premise, they were corrected but still insisted that they wanted to play an elf.

 

[Minigiant]

You could. Why you would bother designing an entire game when you could just add a couple house-rules to an existing one is a question for the individual.

No, a guy who hears GoT and wants an Elf is not an asset.

You're missing my point.
The issue is less the Elf guy

The GM's problem is

"Player #2 "Sure. I will play Lady Noble the Noblest of Nobles!"
That's limiting the number of game systems that could be run OR forces the DM to heavily modify or buy houserules for other game systems.

If Player #4 is your problem, there is a good chance you have a lot more problems coming.

 

[Aldarc]

Even if the Player initially misinterpreted the campaign's premise, they were corrected but still insisted that they wanted to play an elf.

I'm aware of that, but what the player is hearing is the GM shutting down what they were excited to play from that initial pitch. The fight is mostly about the mismanagement of psychological expectations.

 

[Crusadius]

You're missing my point.
The issue is less the Elf guy

The GM's problem is

"Player #2 "Sure. I will play Lady Noble the Noblest of Nobles!"
That's limiting the number of game systems that could be run OR forces the DM to heavily modify or buy houserules for other game systems.

If Player #4 is your problem, there is a good chance you have a lot more problems coming.

I disagree. The premise being "Game of Thrones" should mean they've already considered the possibility of "Lady Noble" and probably already decided on the system and maybe even worked out how to use System X to run the game. An elf character likely has not been accounted for and likely means throwing away most of the effort already made in preparation for the first session.

 

[Crusadius]

I'm aware of that, but what the player is hearing is the GM shutting down what they were excited to play from that initial pitch. The fight is mostly about the mismanagement of psychological expectations.

What the GM is hearing is the Player refusing to engage in their campaign. In any case, one of them could always leave if they're not happy.

 

[Minigiant]

I disagree. The premise being "Game of Thrones" should mean they've already considered the possibility of "Lady Noble" and probably already decided on the system and maybe even worked out how to use System X to run the game. An elf character likely has not been accounted for and likely means throwing away most of the effort already made in preparation for the first session.

That's a lot of assuming you are doing. The DM didn't mention a system or any of the tweak they are don't, or if the style of game the campaign will be.

The enthusiasm of the players mental the elf player is comfortable with the GM or there is a lot of naive thoughts at the table. To me, as both a player and DM, Player 2 is a bigger issue than Player 4.

 

[Jd Smith1]

You're missing my point.
The issue is less the Elf guy

The GM's problem is

"Player #2 "Sure. I will play Lady Noble the Noblest of Nobles!"
That's limiting the number of game systems that could be run OR forces the DM to heavily modify or buy houserules for other game systems.

If Player #4 is your problem, there is a good chance you have a lot more problems coming.

Heavily modify? Maybe add two skills, set goals for members of specific Houses to achieve to earn XP, and set up a method of accounting of actions. I've got a deeply political metaplot going on in my current campaign (Session #28 this week), with less than that. Players can think for themselves; you don't need a dice roll for everything.

Whereas Elf boy either has the too-common Legolas fixation, or he knows nothing about GoT, or didn't like the books. In short, not someone you want in a thinking player's campaign. He needs to find a group that suits his expectations. Hammering a square peg into a round hole is a recipe for failure.

 

[Morrus]

Edited for clarity

NOTE: As no system was mentioned assuming D&D 5e is being used is a false assumption. Other systems that include both Humans and Elfs as playable characters include, Burning Wheel, Warhammer Fantasy Roleplaying, Desolation, Dragon Age, The One Ring, Pathfinder, and most OSR games, among others.

Please vote, or change your vote if you wish. Thank you for all the votes and replies!

In this new scenario, you begin by saying that "The GM, notified ahead of time that they will be running the game has prepared an "elevator pitch" to try to sell the idea of the campaign they wish to run."

So far so good.

But then you go on to ask us to choose between only two possibilities: The player gets to play an elf in this campaign, or the player has to leave the group.

That's not an elevator pitch selling the idea of the campaign. The campaign has clearly been decided, since the only question is about how that player fits into it. Otherwise there would have been another option -- "Discuss the idea of a different campaign which the whole group is on board with." But that option is not present.

Give that it's a group of strangers, I'm not saying you should have to do that (pitch the idea of the campaign), but you did open by saying you did do that.

 

[Jd Smith1]

Wrong thread.