D&D 5E Group Rule Deal-Breakers

[Tony Vargas]

Let's say you're looking to join a group and read their list of rules and requirements, like house rules, what races are allowed, what world is being used, stat creation, or even session time or length...

As a player I'm very picky about system, there have been a lot of really bad systems in the hobby, and very few really good ones - plus, there's a few I'm just nostalgic for. I'd be looking for Hero (BBB or FRED), D&D (1e, 3.0, or 4e), Gamma World (1st, 4th, 'Omega World,' or 7th)/Metamorphosis Alpha(original), RQ(II), 13A, M:tA (oWoD) - or to try something new, like yet another indie game.

 

[Lanefan]

If playing a Evil PC is banned is on your list of auto Outs about a game. I think it's a great thing for both you and whoevers game that was lol.

Like I get that some people like and maybe even can handle playing evil alignments, theoretically, because in 40 years of playing I have not seen this mythical player yet. At least not in a group full of good pc's.

By no means is every PC I play evil, but I want the option to be there - not just for myself, but for all.

You're also assuming the rest of the PCs will be good. A very rare situation, IME.

The thing I hate the most is false sales pitch from the DM when he decides to run a campaign. If you tell me its gonna be a game about pirates and waterborn exploration, dont make us stranded in on an arctic continent for 10 games then have us go back on foot to the south.

Sometimes the DM has no choice in this - the players/PCs just go in unforeseen directions.

I once ran a campaign that I intended to be - or to develop into - a mostly-maritime sort of thing, with pirates and ship-vs.-ship battles and all that good stuff. The players were somewhat aware of this, but it wasn't a hard-sell by any means.

Not through anyone's overt actions or intentions, in both game-world and real-world time it was ages before the PCs ever set foot on a ship. They just kept finding things to do on shore...and then went inland...

Lanefan

 

[Satyrn]

I can't say I've got any dealbreakers. I spent most of the 3e era either looking for a group, then looking for new players to join the trio of us who splintered away from one of those groups I joined, or joining in on groups my internet friends played in.

The deciding factor was always just "do we all have fun playing with each other week after week?"

So, it was always just the group, not the game that mattered.

 

[Croesus]

Are evil PCs banned? If yes, I'm out

Is romance, attachment, jealousy, sex, etc. allowed between PCs? If no, I'm out (and there's DMs who enforce this too)

Are the players allowed to quaff a few beer during the game? If no, what's the point - I'm out

re: evil characters. I'm pretty much the opposite of this. I play RPGs for fun and being indistinguishable from the bad guys just isn't fun to me. Some gray is fine, but planning to murder some merchants, or the destruction of a village just because the barkeep didn't treat us right, or having fun torturing the person we just captured...no thanks.

Besides, I keep hearing folks talk about playing evil characters and how sophisticated/mature/cool they can be without creating problems among the players...but I've never seen it in real life. My few experiences with GM's who allowed evil characters were bad enough. No need to repeat them.

re: romance. Romance, flirting, wooing is all fine. One can even imply - once - that includes sex. Otherwise, players need to keep their sexual fantasies and humor to themselves. Really, I don't want to hear the details and I worry about any player that wants to share them.

re: alcohol. Since the games are always at my place, and I don't drink, beers would be right out. However, if we're playing in someone else's home, beers are fine (so long as no one over-indulges). After all, it's their home, not mine.

 

[pogre]

Some systems would be non-starters for me - like World of Darkness stuff. Even then, if it is a group I like, I might join. However, I'm assuming you are asking about joining a new group.

For D&D - old school or 5e. I have enjoyed every edition, but those are the only ones I am interested in these days.

Starting at a higher level than 3rd would cause me to pause at least. I'm a zero to hero kind of guy mostly.

Restrictions and house rules do not bother me - as long as they are documented and available.

 

[Shiroiken]

Any group who uses "yes, and..." as their primary roleplaying tool.

 

[Lanefan]

re: evil characters. I'm pretty much the opposite of this. I play RPGs for fun and being indistinguishable from the bad guys just isn't fun to me.

Fair enough - if it ain't fun for you, don't do it.

That said, sometimes it's fun to be the bad guy.

Some gray is fine, but planning to murder some merchants, or the destruction of a village just because the barkeep didn't treat us right, or having fun torturing the person we just captured...no thanks.

Evil, of course, takes many forms. Messing with the dead is usually considered Evil, for example; so what would you say to a PC Necromancer whose main schtick was animating the dead to use as shock troops and meat shields for the party? Poison use is another one - the game has usually defined it as an Evil act, but a PC Rogue or Assassin whose main tool of her trade is poison shouldn't be ruled out as unplayable due to this...at least not IMHO.

Funny story about blowing up a village and characters acting out of alignment...

[sblock]Party goes into a village, and into its local tavern. Tavern occupants don't like the look of the party's Part-Orc and run him off. Party MU responds by dropping a fireball into the bar from outside, killing many innocent villagers. Party's Thief then rescues various other innocents from rooms upstairs.

Before this, the MU was Neutral and the Thief was Evil...go figure. [/sblock]

Lanefan

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

Rolling for stats has become a deal-breaker for me and rolling for HP is starting to become one.

Refusing to use errata and Sage Advice is a deal-breaker.

UA however, is OK. As a GM I don't allow UA without a lot of reading and discussion but I'm OK with it in games (in the only game I am playing in, I am running a UA revised Ranger).

 

[ad_hoc]

Evil, of course, takes many forms. Messing with the dead is usually considered Evil, for example; so what would you say to a PC Necromancer whose main schtick was animating the dead to use as shock troops and meat shields for the party? Poison use is another one - the game has usually defined it as an Evil act, but a PC Rogue or Assassin whose main tool of her trade is poison shouldn't be ruled out as unplayable due to this...at least not IMHO.

We have a no evil PC rule at our table.

That is the short form of it. It is really a 2 part rule:

1. No outright intra-party conflict. The party is a team, characters can disagree and have tension but cannot attack, steal from, sabotage, etc. other PCs.

2. No brazenly evil acts. This one is like porn, can't define it but we know what it is when we see it.

-- Example 1: Usually the PCs have a choice of plot hooks to follow to end up in different adventures. One of these hooks happens to be an old tomb that is rumoured to have treasure buried with its occupant. Robbing the tomb is desecrating it. This is an evil act, but it's not brazenly evil. Some PCs in the party argue that the dead aren't using it and if they had it they could accomplish more, so it is for the greater good.

-- Example 2: A merchant has something the PC wants so the PC kills the merchant. This one is just flat out not allowed. It's just not fun for our group and allows 1 PC in the party to dictate the course of the game.

 

[Raith5]

I just play whatever is being played. I cant imagine having really specific lists of preferences and finding people to play with. I even played classic Traveller the other day and at least my character did not die in the character creation process.