D&D 5E Obligation to give new players a "Core" game?

[Wik]

TL;DR - Does a GM have an obligation to provide a "generic" campaign setting to first-time players?

My girlfriend and I live in a small town about an hour's drive from Victoria BC, which is where we game on our regular monday nights. I've been gaming with this group for years now, and this campaign isn't going to end anytime soon.

However, small town life being what it is, we're beginning to find that we want some sort of weekly social activity to keep us involved and less hermit-like. Someone else is running a board game night, so we floated the idea of a weekly D&D game, and there are nearly 20 "Applicants" (ie, people that are interested in at least seeing what the game is like).

I've spent a few hours putting together ideas for a campaign. I want it attached to my current world, but in a different region, and so decided to develop the "Caliphate of the Seven Sands", a sort of arabic/carthage combination with a touch of Persia thrown in for good measure. And I made a really cool draft of the setting - genies, elemental-touched genasi nobles, elemental cults, dark and brooding versions of the normally nice campaign gods, rampaging gnoll tribes, and scheming rakshasa.

It sounded really cool, until I got to thinking. Of the twenty-ish players that are interested, only about a quarter have ever actually played. When we get a table running, at least half of the players will be complete newbies, or really close. The setting I have dreamed up is pretty high-concept and original, and doesn't really deal with a lot of the "core" conceits of a standard D&D setting. Undead and Goblins are basically non-existant. Dragons are found in only small doses. It's an arabian/african vibe instead of european. And so on.

Should I maybe drop this idea and present something more "standard" D&D to these players? Something more Forgotten Realms or Lord of the Rings? After all, if this is their only exposure and they walk away after only a few sessions (something I'm sure will happen with a few), they could have the impression that what D&D is "about" is african/arabic themes, sword-and-sandal type stuff, as opposed to the dungeon crawls we all know and love.

How "original" should you be when presenting the game to primarily new players? Will the game suffer if you go "too" original for first timers?

 

[hawkeyefan]

Is it possible to poll the potential players and see if they will like that kind of game? Or are they so unfamiliar with the game and RPGing in general that they won't even really understand what you're asking?

If it's possible, I would get their feedback and then use that to decide.

If it's not possible, then a more recognizable, "classic" setting might be easiest for them to wrap their minds around.

But then again, 20 players is way too many, right? So maybe the less generic setting will help whittle the numbers down to a manageable amount?

 

[the Jester]

To answer your TL; DR: No. Your obligation is to provide them with a fun game, and if it's high-concept, great! Just because they are noobs doesn't make them stupid. They'll get it. Have faith in them- or maybe a better way of putting it is, choose player who can handle the high concept. Sounds like you've got a great pool.

 

[Wik]

Is it possible to poll the potential players and see if they will like that kind of game? Or are they so unfamiliar with the game and RPGing in general that they won't even really understand what you're asking?

A general mix amongst the interested players. A few have a general idea of the game. A few played back in the 90s or early aughts. But I think most don't really "get" that it's a game where the GM makes the setting, and can do all sorts of weird things with that. I think most equate D&D with Lord of the Rings.

If it's possible, I would get their feedback and then use that to decide.

Not entirely possible, since I don't really know who my players are until we actually get the ball rolling, I'm afraid.

If it's not possible, then a more recognizable, "classic" setting might be easiest for them to wrap their minds around.

Makes sense, and I can see the point.

But then again, 20 players is way too many, right? So maybe the less generic setting will help whittle the numbers down to a manageable amount?

Oh, we'll be paring it down. I don't know how it works with you, but I've always found that when setting up things like board game nights or the like, if you have twelve people interested, six will actually say they'll be there. And come game night, three will actually show up.

 

[fuindordm]

I'd go with the setting that you're enthusiastic about. You'll communicate that feeling to the players.
Also, nearly everyone is familiar with Arabian Nights. Pitch the setting to them that way, and they shouldn't have a problem.

 

[Jester David]

Hrm... good question.

I would try to allow all the core options and limit too many house rules, to provide as baseline an example of play as possible. Keep things simple and allow the expected options. Because players might want to be the elf ranger or dwarf fighter or other iconic character type. But, the presentation of said options - how it flavoured - should be customizable and adjusted to fit the new setting.
The dwarf fighter works just as well in lighter chain armour wrapped in flowing robes. So long as the players are warned before the game and before they start thinking of characters then things should be fine. If the players show up to the game and want to play a lancing knight it gets tricky, but if they're given time to thing (and some inspiration/ source material) it should work better. If given some time to think, people will find a concept that excites them, be it a Persian prince, parkour assassin, Saracen knight, whirling dervish, or genie warlock.
A player's guide would be lovely in this situation. A couple sentences on the races and classes. But preferably under two pages.

Start things off simple. Think of the most generic, familiar adventure (western tale) and run that, but just tweak the tone. Something familiar and iconic, but with a twist. Like having everyone meet in a coffee shop rather than an inn - because alcohol isn't consumed - then hired to clear the basement of large scarab beetles before acting as guards on a camel train.
And be sure and include some short narration or DM asides to remind them of the culture.

 

[Dkase]

You should definitely try to present the campaign setting you invested so much into as a first choice. Get in touch with those that showed the most interest and let them know the style of game that you're running and see if they are still okay with that type of game. If you want to 'ease' them into your setting, starting them off in the traditional Tolkien-esque type setting then gradually moving their adventures to you're planned world would be a good alternative.

 

[transtemporal]

Nah, I say go for it. I would let them know ahead of time the setting, tone, genre you're going for and maybe give them some shows, movies, books or games so they know the imagery and mood you're trying to evoke. That way if it's not their cup of tea they can decline without disappointment on anyone's part.

 

[delericho]

I wouldn't say the DM has any obligation to provide a 'generic' experience - D&D is already a pretty broad church, after all.

I do think there are some advantages to giving the 'generic' experience, in that it helps people get to grips with what's going on more easily, but if the DM is enthusiastic about running something else then that's a far greater advantage anyway.

 

[aramis erak]

Obligated to provide core? no.
Obligated to inform that it's not Core? yes.
It avoids a lot of "but my rulebook says..."