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

[Remathilis]

The answer, of course, is always "No, you don't HAVE to do anything you don't want." (except die and pay taxes).

That said, I've introduced a lot of new players to D&D over the years and used some very different settings to do it, and I find the bland "default" model has a few advantages over the more esoteric settings. Here's why.

The Player's Handbook gives some good examples, advice, and art that can help a new player create his character. In a core game, I can point to dragonborn, elves, and warlocks and say "that's how it is". If you change that, you have to either tell them "read this, and then change these things (which is confusing for even some veteran players) or you're going to have to write up your own descriptions, which begins the process of invalidating the PHB. (And if any one of the 20 buy the book, the last thing they'll want is find their $50 book is invalid).

Furthermore, if you are going to change settings, keep everything else constant. If you do an Arabian Nights setting, still make it have elves, dwarves, halflings, clerics, rogues, and wizards. This isn't the time to introduce new races, radically re-work classes, or change the spell system to spell points, no matter how much it fits your concept of Shi'ar. If possible, keep most of tropes from classic D&D there, just wallpaper over them where needed.

So you CAN do it, but you are adding another level of complexity to an already fairly complex game. Not only will players need to remember what the book says, but they will need to remember where you changed things as well. Consider preparing a cheat sheet if your going to make departures from the PHB; if you changed weapon names (or don't have certain types; like plate), if elves have differences (they live in Oasis's and are Xenophobic. Also, there are no wood elves or dark elves) or if things aren't allowed (no monks). Try to limit the latter however.

So it can work (I intro'd a new group in Eberron, and that did deviate a LOT from the PHB) but you are adding additional complexity to the game by doing so. As long as you and your players are fine with that, be my guest. I still wouldn't deviate too far (for example, avoid Dark Sun, a setting so different it deserves its own PHB) but otherwise, have fun.

tl;dr verison

1.) Core is simplest because it doesn't require the players to change what is in the PHB
2.) If you don't do core, limit your changes to mostly cosmetic changes
3.) Avoid adding homebrew races, classes, or house rules, even if they fit the setting
4.) Make sure everyone knows where you are deviating from the PHB and why.

 

[hawkeyefan]

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.



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



Makes sense, and I can see the point.



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.

Ha very true.

As others have said, I don't think an Arabian Nights flavor is too far from the norm for the players. I would say as long as you're allowing what's in the PHB for classes and options, then you should be fine.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

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.

This sounds like the right answer to me.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

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

Gut reaction, without reading any of the post: Hell no. However, I do think that it is a very good idea to provide an open-minded campaign setting for first-time players. A person's first game is a specific kind of first impression. They will almost surely internalize aspects of the play they experience, which will lay the foundations for how they define "playing an RPG." These experiences will carry on to future games, and will color their perception of both the hobby as a whole, and the specific game you play. Being open to their ideas will foster precisely the kind of creativity and spontaneity that most D&D fans explicitly say they want to see (even though many fans' rhetoric is often very pro-tradition, anti-innovation, unfortunately).

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?

Ah, you meant "core" in the sense of "the traditional archetypes" rather than in the sense of "you can ONLY play dwarf/elf/halfling/human!!"

I don't think there's anything wrong with playing something that is not the bog-standard setting...but there are a few things worth thinking about, in line with my initial response:

1) If someone wants to play a character that isn't strictly in keeping with your perception of the setting, please really truly consider working with them to adapt it to fit. For example, if someone really wanted to play a Nordic-style barbarian, you potentially could--remember that, as sailors, the Vikings really got around, and the medieval Middle East was super big on trade in the Mediterranean, so they probably would've come into contact with the occasional Germanic sailor or Mongol tribesman wandered far from home. Will it be exotic? Certainly! But if they're on board with that, it could be a lot of fun. Similarly, if someone wants to play a race you're not keen on (Dragonborn, to my lament, are at the top of the list for this one) please consider letting them. Perhaps they are the legacy left behind by the dragons, which is why they are rare in this part of the world--the dragons were dying out, so they created the "dragonspawn" (or whatever) to continue their legacy; or maybe dragonborn are from the deep desert, where their scaly skin makes it easier for them to survive things a human could not.

2) Be prepared for some degree of expectation mismatch--e.g. "Wow, I was expecting Tolkien, and this is...really different!" On the one hand, this can mean that people might be thrown off and need time to "get into it," but on the other hand, this can help establish the idea that D&D is no pigeonholed, that it is a much broader and more open game than they're experienced with. It's very likely that some of the people who have applied have played SOME kind of fantasy RPG (WoW, Skyrim, Zelda) and so many will be used to associating "roleplaying game" with Tolkien-style pseudo-European fantasy; giving them something other than that could be either disorienting or liberating, and you'll want to pay attention to their response. In other words, I think it's perfectly legitimate to pitch the idea, but be prepared for people to be surprised, and handle that surprise in appropriate ways (depending on if it's "good" or "bad" surprise, that is).

3) Consider carefully the people you might be running for. Are any of them Arabic themselves? Do any of them practice Islam (not, at all, the same thing)? Did any of them serve in the military? (Remembering that, for some of them, an Arabian Nights-flavored setting may bring up memories, for good or for ill.) Basically, just give a thought to who you're DMing for, and whether there might be sensitive subjects to address (or avoid) as a result.

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

I'd probably go for some races being 'of the setting' and others, if the players have their hearts set on them, being available from being slaves or traders. I like the idea of dragonborn societies on the deserts living in huge, above ground termite mound like cities; elves coming from the forests to the edge of the deserts whose ancestral lands are being eaten into by the encroaching sands; tieflings being some sort of human-djinn offspring; and half orcs being essentially sand people from tattooine. Not sure about dwarves or gnomes or halflings but I'm sure you can get them in there.
I'd always go with the show you are excited about - just make sure the players are on board too at session zero.

 

[steeldragons]

Do you have an obligation to? No. Think this is fairly well obviously unanimous...and we all deserve a 5-star vacation for having a unanimous agreement on any D&D topic anywhere ever! Yay us! Everyone take the rest of the week off.

Should you start them in a more "Core" [LotR] game? I am thinking, if that is the point of reference and expectation of half (or more) of your potential players, then yes.

Seems completely easy and doable to have the game begin, with the "core" races and classes, in a LotR farming village or town setting outside of the desert...maybe along some trade route. But not, like, a world away.

Have a few sessions of "round the rural community"/stop the goblins/bandits/moathouse basic type adventures to get people's feet wet and familiarize themselves with their characters/abilities.

Then pull out the Lost City or Pharaoh or a little Oasis of the White Palm action to bring them into the Seven Sands. Introduce a genasi lord/villain/benefactor..and engage/engross them in the Caliphate.

This is a rare case where you can totally have your cake [the Caliphate campaign] and eat it too [easily grokked introductory game/world for the newbs].

Sounds awesome and will look forward to updates/let us know how this group shapes up and likes the game.

 

[Celtavian]

When I was a newbie, I loved exploring new areas regardless of the milieu. If you throw in a djinni's lamp, your players will have a blast figuring out what to wish for.

 

[Remathilis]

Do you have an obligation to? No. Think this is fairly well obviously unanimous...and we all deserve a 5-star vacation for having a unanimous agreement on any D&D topic anywhere ever! Yay us! Everyone take the rest of the week off.

Should you start them in a more "Core" [LotR] game? I am thinking, if that is the point of reference and expectation of half (or more) of your potential players, then yes.

Seems completely easy and doable to have the game begin, with the "core" races and classes, in a LotR farming village or town setting outside of the desert...maybe along some trade route. But not, like, a world away.

Have a few sessions of "round the rural community"/stop the goblins/bandits/moathouse basic type adventures to get people's feet wet and familiarize themselves with their characters/abilities.

Then pull out the Lost City or Pharaoh or a little Oasis of the White Palm action to bring them into the Seven Sands. Introduce a genasi lord/villain/benefactor..and engage/engross them in the Caliphate.

This is a rare case where you can totally have your cake [the Caliphate campaign] and eat it too [easily grokked introductory game/world for the newbs].

Sounds awesome and will look forward to updates/let us know how this group shapes up and likes the game.

That is a good way to do it too; do a few levels of generic games, then give them some reason to go to the desert area.

 

[Aenghus]

For me the necessary features are to make sure there's room for the players to grow into the setting, and that it's sufficiently lenient on new learning players that they can make mistakes and learn from them rather get their PCs instantly killed by those mistakes.

Strange cultures with strong customs peculiar to the players can easily set up a situation where a mistake by one PC (that s/he may not even know was a mistake beforehand) can get the whole party killed, exiled, enslaved etc.

Some new players need to learn to trust the referee before they gain confidence to make decision for their PC, and that trust has to be earned.

Others immediately try to steal everything moveable and burn down everything that isn't, attempting to kill anyone who stands in their way. Myself, I put a halt to proceedings when I see this starting to happen and tell the player or players concerned that their PCs will get killed in short order with such tactics. In other games this such tactics are standard operating procedure so YMMV.

 

[SteveC]

I think the obligation you have towards new players is to give them a fun introduction to the hobby. From what I've seen, if the DM is excited about the game, that tends to reflect into how the sessions go, with the reverse also being true.

If it were me, I'd run the game I wanted to, and tell the group that you're running things that are a little different than what they might experience in another D&D game. (Of course, you should add that "my game will be more awesome as well!")

I'd add that you might find the more standard D&D world setting exists in your game world, it's just another part of it, so if a character wanted to be a knight, for instance, they might be a visitor from a distant land.

But have fun, and the players will come with you.