Mixing Races....and why DM's shouldn't allow it

[DonTadow]

Korgoth - That link was awesome!!! Thanks!

To clarify my 'necessity' comment from earlier, I'm talking terms of rule system. A rule system that doesn't allow hybridisation is not my scene.

If you don't like this stuff in your campaign, go, 'No dude, you're not playing that in my campaign, deal.'

You're not forcing the player to play in your campaign, and likewise the player isn't forcing you to GM a campaign for them. At least, I hope not.

Half-flumph lycanthropic anarchic paragon displacer beast monk?!?!
I want this player in my campaign. Unimaginative blighters keep playing humans.


At this stage, you A) make a house rule where a player cannot play the same race or class twice in a row, and B) say 'C'mon, guys. That's getting lame, do something original.'

If your players are worth playing with, they'll respond, either with a fair reply (that doesn't involve being a munchkin) or they'll go, 'OK.' and play something else.

Hey, 8 billion humans in the world each different and multifaceted, not to mention the billiosn that have already lived on earth, hero and not. Then add to that the million or so human heroes in literature and media. When a person has to have so many different races to "get off" in a gme, their really getting into the power gaming function. I doubt any of these players would be so interested in the character if you stripped all the abilities from the creature with the logic that with so many different races and mixes you would probably not retain everything and what you did retain would only be a fragment of your heritage.

 

[Mark Plemmons]

Is it ok to stack races or monster classes onto others, does it make sense, and how would it really work?

I say, no, the creature, if survived, if somehow was able to be born, would die soon after, or as gross as it is, not survive the months in the womb in the first place and be born already dead.

Agreed. Here's some text and a formula I wrote for Dangerous Denizens, for some new half-human races (and the tel-amhothlan (half-elf/half-orc):

"Some sages say that only humans may effectively crossbreed with some other nonhuman races. Whether this is due to the natural physiology of humans, or if the deities themselves have some hand in it, is not known. However, it does seem to have some basis in fact. For example, a human may crossbreed with a dwarf, but a dwarf cannot crossbreed with a hobgoblin.

Exceptions to this belief have been reported, however, for there is some scant evidence of a bizarre crossbreed of hobgoblin and orc known as an "uk-karg" (see the Kingdoms of Kalamar supplement, Strength & Honor: the Mighty Hobgoblins of Tellene). Another exception is the "tel-amhothlan," a half-elf/half-orc (see below) that owes its existence to the fact that orcs will often mate with captured elves, and that the Creator of Strife used the elven form in creating his orc race. For more information on the origin of the orcs, see the Kingdoms of Kalamar supplement, Fury in the Wastelands.

The tel-amhothlan and uk-karg have given rise to the theory that the demihuman races, particularly orcs and goblinoids, may be as capable at crossbreeding as humans. Of course, such speculations have not yet been proven to the general satisfaction of most philosophers.

In the following seven cases of crossbreeding listed below, the offspring only has a 25% chance to grow to full term (half-breed offspring often develop complications when both parents are of greatly differing races, such as human and gnoll). Half-breeds that survive the birthing process have a 50% chance of surviving past their first month. Those that do survive the first month have a 75% chance to live a normal lifespan, while the other 25% die at middle age. As such, the population of these half-breeds equals no more than 1 half-blood for every 500,000 humans."

 

[William drake]

I hear that the yeti likes to play half-flumph lycanthropic anarchic paragon displacer beast monks, while the Bigfoot prefers half-vampire tauric chimeric three-kreen/monkey rogues. The mothman, though, always plays straight human fighter. Just wants to fit in for once.

Sorry, still laughing.

 

[William drake]

I was thinking more of this:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/eo/20070223a

... which I find totally brain-breaking.

I was not claiming that someone wanted to play a character of that nature. Only that I prefer not to have a bunch of rules and minute distinctions covering all of those sorts of things. Sorry if I was unclear.

Once again, still laughing.

Now, when I started this blog, that was the stuff I feared as a DM, though now I must point out, I've never seen such things before. And, would still say no to them, but if a player even mentioned those things to me, once I finished laughing, I would allow them to uper their starting package, and even a few levels for their creativity.


*thinking back, laughing more*

 

[Thunderfoot]

Time for good 'ol DM hypocrisy - I will not allow half-anything for players (even half-elves or half-orcs were not allowed to start). Why, becuase it helps establish a baseline thought process for the characters - "Elves do not breed with 'lesser' races" was an actual player quote from the only elf in the party in relation to asking about a laison with her beautiful but otherwise cold character (think Vulcan with even less inter-personal skills than normal).

So we now have a precedence, which means its time for me to inject something that makes the players go - WHAT? There is a 'barbarian' culture to the north and one of the tribes is elvish in make-up, they interbreed with pretty much anyone willing to follow their religion so there are a large amount of half-elves running around (including human, dwarf (ugly), gnome (think anorexic midgets (I'll call him mini-model)), and orcs) yep this should pretty much disgust the elvish player into convulsions.

Oh course none of these will be allowed as PCs, but as the DM, I am allowed to disallow or allow anything as long as the story is good and in this case it will be quite exquisite.

One finale thought, would a half-elf/half-kobold be an Elbo(w)?

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Oh course none of these will be allowed as PCs, but as the DM, I am allowed to disallow or allow anything as long as the story is good and in this case it will be quite exquisite.

I don't like that sort of double standards. If it's there, and it's appropriate for a player race, it should be playable (not that I would say no to a Mind Flayer character - the level adjustment for critters are usually enough to put players off).

If I don't allow something, I usually have a very good explanation for it, because I'd want one of it was done to me.

 

[Thunderfoot]

I don't like that sort of double standards. If it's there, and it's appropriate for a player race, it should be playable (not that I would say no to a Mind Flayer character - the level adjustment for critters are usually enough to put players off).

If I don't allow something, I usually have a very good explanation for it, because I'd want one of it was done to me.

I can't agree, only becaase, I can also nerf an NPC if the balance isn't right without the players ever knowing it happened, I can't do that to a PC without someone crying foul. If I screw up as a DM and the only thing that gets hurt in the process is my pride, I can handle that, if I suddenly have to talk to a player because a decision I made is going to screw their character concept over, then I have to deal with possible hurt feelings, sudden campaign shift (you wake up and find Bobby in the shower syndrome), and maybe even a player leaving the table, I don't want that. Too many DMs have forgotten that they weild power that players just don't have. (That's why they're called Dungeon MASTERS. ) A half-celestial PC is verbotten, a half-celestial NPC is fine, why, I can control the NPC, the PC is out of my control. I can suddenly have the NPC 'go way' if they break balance, I can't tell a PC to 'just go away', does that make sense?

 

[Kae'Yoss]

I can't agree, only becaase, I can also nerf an NPC if the balance isn't right without the players ever knowing it happened, I can't do that to a PC without someone crying foul. If I screw up as a DM and the only thing that gets hurt in the process is my pride, I can handle that, if I suddenly have to talk to a player because a decision I made is going to screw their character concept over, then I have to deal with possible hurt feelings, sudden campaign shift (you wake up and find Bobby in the shower syndrome), and maybe even a player leaving the table, I don't want that. Too many DMs have forgotten that they weild power that players just don't have. (That's why they're called Dungeon MASTERS. ) A half-celestial PC is verbotten, a half-celestial NPC is fine, why, I can control the NPC, the PC is out of my control. I can suddenly have the NPC 'go way' if they break balance, I can't tell a PC to 'just go away', does that make sense?

Sort of. That's why you think about things before you allow them - that means that less things have to be taken away again. And it's about the kind of players you have: The guys I play with have no problem with powers being edited out if they turn out to be too powerful.

I have found that those who throw a fit because some power-boosting ability is taken from them because it broke the game are usually power-gamers of the bad sort, the ones who try to win the game over the others. Might not always be so, but the cases I witnessed were like that. Those who complained about nerfings were usually those who tried to make the best possible character. At times like that, I don't mind certain people leaving the table - I might be the one sending them away.

Remember: I don't say that you should allow overpowered stuff. If something's too powerful, weaken it. They can play the half-dragon, but the str and con bonuses are each 2 lower. That sort of thing.

 

[Gez]

I don't like that sort of double standards. If it's there, and it's appropriate for a player race, it should be playable[...].

And here you go, you keep the double standard. And it's appropriate for a player race. Who decides if something is appropriate? Is it only a mechanical issue?

In the Eberron campaign I co-DM, we banned Kalashtars. Not out of mechanical reasons, but because we felt they were too rare and too secretive to be allowed for a first Eberron campaign, they had to be discovered in-game first before being left open as an option out of game.

There are many races that are balanced to be playable in my homebrew, but which I wouldn't let the player get because they have a role so specific that I prefer them to stay mysterious and largely outside of the spotlight.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

And here you go, you keep the double standard. And it's appropriate for a player race. Who decides if something is appropriate? Is it only a mechanical issue?

Me, of course

My main concern is that it is sentient (Int 3+ is very helpful) and can interact with others on a verbal and physical level (i.e. it can talk and pick things up and hit things). I could see waiving the physical part (for a ghost, for example).

So animals are usually out, as are constructs, mindless undead, and the like. Not that anyone ever told me he wanted to play one.