GM Authority (Edited For Clarity, Post #148)

[doctorbadwolf]

It’s comparable to someone wanting to play an elf in a DnD game with no elves.

Not at all.

 

[macd21]

Not at all.

I fail to see the difference. You could play a Werewolf or a Mage in Vampire. The games have a common base system. You can play an elf in DnD, regardless of setting, because there’s a common base system. That is what Player 4 is asking for - to play an elf in a humans-only game. It’s just like asking to play a Werewolf in a Vampire-only game of Vampire, on the basis that they have a common system.

 

[Imaculata]

I've had a player come up to me, asking if he could play an elf, in a setting of mine that doesn't have elves. I allowed it, but told him he would be a visitor from another world, and people would respond accordingly. And that was fine with him. We both adjusted to make it work. After all, it is only a game.

 

[aramis erak]

Okay?

It makes mixed parties require multiple rulebooks, and that is often a problem. Not always, but often. Also, a Mage is way disproportionate to anything else in power level. And mummies really only have to fear magi, as anything else can only inconvenience them for a few decades. Magi can do nastiness to mummies.

 

[Aldarc]

Because after the same character showing up ten times in ten different guises it's going to get a bit tedious for everyone else. Same problem as a player naming every character Bob, only here the name changes while the underlying character doesn't.

But we are dealing with an approach to OSR that involves pawn stance and skilled play so the character name or even the in-character "acting" to entertain the fellow players is not necessarily a play priority.

 

[macd21]

I've had a player come up to me, asking if he could play an elf, in a setting of mine that doesn't have elves. I allowed it, but told him he would be a visitor from another world, and people would respond accordingly. And that was fine with him. We both adjusted to make it work. After all, it is only a game.

And that’s great, if that works for you and the campaign you’ve created. But I’ve run campaigns where that simply wouldn’t have worked for me. And based on the description of the OP’s campaign, that would be of the kind where it wouldn’t work.

 

[aramis erak]

And that’s great, if that works for you and the campaign you’ve created. But I’ve run campaigns where that simply wouldn’t have worked for me. And based on the description of the OP’s campaign, that would be of the kind where it wouldn’t work.

Agreed, to a point.

There's nothing in the OP's initial statement that makes it clear one way or the other on whether allowing it as an alien wouldn't work, and there are non-human intelligences in the inspirational setting.

The question as asked is not about would it work, but should the GM cave. And if the question is accurate to the situation, and others have bought into the setup, when the GM says no, the wanna-be elf, if they are reasonable, either chooses to sit out, or chooses to give in.

Humans are not always reasonable. In fact, many are often unreasonable. I can be unreasonable often. I try not to be unreasonable when it is important to be reasonable, but I don't succeed there, either, all the time. Which reminds me: time for meds, so I'm a reasonable human tomorrow.

 

[Jd Smith1]

I've had a player come up to me, asking if he could play an elf, in a setting of mine that doesn't have elves. I allowed it, but told him he would be a visitor from another world, and people would respond accordingly. And that was fine with him. We both adjusted to make it work. After all, it is only a game.

I've had a similar situation, booted the player, and we both lived happily ever after.

 

[embee]

But the pitch was "you're vampires..." not "you're supernatural creatures." If I had pitched a game by saying, "you're all creatures from the World of Darkness who have banded together against a mysterious force that threatens you all" then a mage, werewolf, changeling, or even a mummy would be acceptable. But the pitch was vampires.

Of course another clue is "We're playing Vampire the Masquerade." There shouldn't be any expectation of playing a werewolf in Vampire the Masquerade.

P1: Can I play a changeling? Or maybe a mummy?

GM: Get the hell out of here! You know no one here has those books. You'll be lucky if I let you play a wraith character.

 

[BookTenTiger]

Let's play this scenario out...

GM "I would like to play a campaign influenced by Game of Thrones. It will still have magic and monsters but the characters will be regular people in a medieval land.

P1 "Nice. I will play Sir Knight the Knightliest of Knights!"

P2 "Sure. I will play Lady Noble the Noblest of Nobles!"

P3 "Sweet. I will play Sir Sneak the Sneakiest of Sneaks!"

P4 "Okay. I will play Sir Elf the Elfiest of Elfs!"

GM "No. I just said it's a human-only campaign"

P4 "Well, if I'm going to play, I want an exception. I'm an elf. So I get darkvision, get +2 to perception checks, have advantage on Saving Throws against being Charmed, and sleep won't work on me because I don't need sleep."

GM "Fine. I want to keep the group together so you can be an elf."

P2 "Hey, if he gets an exception, I want one too. She's a noble and likes hunting. So I want her to have a rifle. And she's going to be a variant human and I'll take Gunner as a feat."

P1: "My knight's backstory is that his family was killed by orcs. So put in some orc encounters for him."

P3: "Can we start out at level 5? I want my character to multiclass as a shadow monk/rogue so I can have a Batman build."

This sounds like an awesome campaign. GoT style politics, intrigue, and body count, but there are elves and rifles and orcs. I'd play it in a heartbeat.

In your scenario, it's obvious that the GM and players don't want to play the same game.

What I notice in a lot of these discussions is that the priority seems to be "Protect the GM's vision."

I call bullpucky on that. The GM's vision is no more or less important than anyone else's. I don't care if the GM spent $100,000 on all the books and minis and has spent 25 years perfecting their campaign world. If you are getting together with a group of human beings for a group activity, it should be expected that everyone's voice is heard equitably.

If we shift the goal to "Play an RPG everyone will enjoy" then the solution is obvious.

Throw some elves and guns and orcs in there, or play something else!

Overall though, the group in your hyperbolic example seems extremely engaged, and that's awesome. They're just not engaged in the DM's singular vision.

Still, I would play the heck out of that campaign!