How Accommodating to Player Preferences Should the GM Be?

[Reynard]

Let's say the Gm decides they want to run a relatively standard medieval fantasy campaign focused on exploring a frontier region that was once part of an ancient, long collapsed arcane empire (so lots of the usual exploration, dungeon crawling, and finding of magical loot). Everyone is in and positive about the premise.

However, one player really wants to play a very non-standard character. In this example, we'll use a person from our world portal-fantasied into the campaign, but it could be anything (a weird species, a more steampunk or sci-fi character concept, or whatever). This was not something the GM had considered and isn't something the setting is "built" to accommodate, but it also isn't something that inherently "breaks" the setting or rules either.

In your opinion, how accomodating should the GM be to the player with the unusual request? Does it depend on the player? What if the other players, seeing the possibility, also have unsual character ideas? Have you allowed this? How did it go.

NOTE: The presumption in this discussion is that the player with the unusual request is making the request in good faith, and is still "in" for the declared premise of the campaign (exploring land and ruins, looking for loot while dealing with monsters etc).

 

[paradisebunny]

My gut instinct is to say no, as in every social interaction for the entire campaign the unusual (to the setting) character will stick out like a sore thumb. This either takes table time to justify it every time (not fun) to keep the world believable or the character has to remain in the shadows / hidden in these interactions. This is all still possible but my main argument against this is this: it sets up uneven table time / spotlight between the players from the start.

 

[paradisebunny]

Additionally I think that the GM still has to reach out a hand and present some interesting options. Maybe replace one or two of the dwarf/halfling/elf/human standard fare with something enticing that will capture the players imagination. Crown and Skull for example uses frog people to great effect.

 

[Celebrim]

If it's a new player the answer is "No. Never accommodate anything of the sort."

The reason is that 90% of those players making the special request are actually signaling that they are dysfunctional players in one form or the other. Either they are spotlight hogs that always want the attention to be on them and the game to be about them, or else they are emotionally immature optimizers that want to get some sort of edge so that they can win and who are probably going to be frustrated if they aren't successful in breaking the game.

If on the other hand you've played extensively with this player and they have proven themselves as a highly functional, social gamer with good thespian skills, then you can say "Yes" most of the time because you know that they actually have an idea and are going to want to try to make the game fun for everyone at the table and be entertaining with their idea. Occasionally the idea is not one that leads to fun play over the long run, and if you feel that is the case you can usually hold a mature conversation with the player to see how they plan on coping with the problems and having fun in the long run and not just for a single or a few sessions.

 

[KYRON45]

Give them what they want in exchange for them DMing next time so you can be the square wheel.
I'm a firm believer that the players should start the campaign within the confines of the DMs vision. Should that character come to an untimely demise....the next PC can work with the DM to be the odd man out. At least this way that 2nd PC can be incorporated into the game as some kind of story element.

 

[TiQuinn]

In your opinion, how accomodating should the GM be to the player with the unusual request? Does it depend on the player? What if the other players, seeing the possibility, also have unsual character ideas? Have you allowed this? How did it go.

I’ll hear the player out and see if there’s a happy medium. I find there’s only very few times that I can’t wrap my head around an idea and make it work within a game the way I want to run it. But usually if it’s something from a sourcebook that I haven’t allowed, I stand pretty firm. My reasoning is typically that I haven’t reviewed those rules in full or there are simply options in the book that I feel get away from the spirit of the campaign. I’d rather disallow the book than start picking bits and pieces out of it.

 

[Velderan]

It depends on the player. I've been playing with the same group for the last 5 years pretty much weekly, so there's probably not much I'd flat out say no to because I'm confident they'd work with me on making the concept fit in the campaign we're playing. But if it was a new player asking, I'd want to know more about what they're hoping to get out of their request and see either how I could make it fit (knowing I might not be able to count on the player to help once the game starts) or figure out something within the campaign idea I'm running that would give them something closer to what they're looking for. If it's really extreme, I'd just say no to a new player and let them walk if it's that big of a deal.

 

[payn]

I think the example is a good one in the OP. My answer sadly is an unhelpful, it depends. I do think GMs should be somewhat accommodating, but I think players should be mindful as well. If the player always pulls the fish out of water routine, that could be too disruptive. I usually end up moving away from such players. Though, on occasion an interesting idea presents itself that can work for both GM and player. The request should at least get some consideration before denial, but denial is always a possibility.

I am one of those fuddy duddies that doesnt like guns in their fantasy RPGs. So, when PF1 introduced them I largely ignored it. Especially, since it used mechanics that were certainly not intended to be used by martial characters. Seemed like both a controversial addition, and poorly executed design. A double whammy. Then, I decided to run Iron Gods which is very much fantasy smashed into sci-fi and I decided becasue of the cool sci-fi gear to open up the gunslinger. Of course, the young lad (son of another player) decided to lean into black musket archetype and none of the cool stuff was applicable to them. Seemed the young lad was picking it becasue they read on forums what a combat beast it could be. The PC was overpowered but it wasnt too much of an issue becasue for some reason the PC was always in the right place at the very wrong time. That PC got beat repeatedly so took as well as it got.

The above story worked out ok in the end, but im still hesitant to allow things I dont want to allow as a GM. Though, there seems to be a right time and place for anything. As a GM I try to keep that in mind, also as a player I keep the GMs game in mind as well. YMMV.

 

[MGibster]

In the OP's premise, we're to assume the player is making a good faith effort. I once had a player in a Vampire game decide he wanted to be an Anarch but it was after the group had already voted to be Camarilla. I had to explain to him three different times that an Anarch would not work as they were enemies of the Camarilla.

It is my policy to start out with the assumption a player is making a good faith effort to create a character within the parameters set forth by the campaign. Those assumptions have tested my faith at times. As a GM, I try to make a good faith effort of my own to accommodate players though it isn't always possible. Each case needs to be examined individually.

 

[Reynard]

I'm pretty accommodating in general, not least because I don't really create deep worlds or have immutable lore. If a player wants to play an elf ninja in an otherwise Dark Ages northern England-ish campaign, I let them and see where it goes. (This was a real situation that ended up helping the world expand beyond my initial vision, so it was a net positive.) This isn't to say that I never say "no" but it is rare.

I think some GMs take their worlds and campaign themes/milieus way too seriously. And while I have occasionally encountered the spotlight hog player, it has never really been connected to the uniqueness of their PC's race or whatever. It is almost always because the player fails to realize it isn't a single player CRPG, regardless of what their character looks like.