D&D 5E Out of the Abyss - No Drizzt afterall?

[Green1]

This. Players who don't want the GM to curate a world that interests them within reason really need to go the way of typewriters and VHS tapes.

True. But a Minotaur can be dealt with and adjusted to the power level of the game.

But, a sentient ooze dual wielding rocket launchers riding a celestial force dragon mount would kind of be out there. But, that is more because of power level and tech level in the world than any attempt at controlling player creativity. But, this is, like you say, subjective. If you are running some kind of Planescape/ Gamma World/ He-Man Eternia cross campaign a sentient rocket launcher ooze hero might have a place. In fact, it would be cool. But a strict Dark Sun, FR, or Eberron deal would break genre. But we are not talking that. We are talking outright banning from games what, for better or worse, are CLASSIC templates that a good player could do well and actually spice up a campaign. I also do not buy the "my world curated" deal. Planar portals and accidents happen. Even if your world had no Drow or Minotaur, think of the epic quest and hooks to figure out what happened or possibly a way back home. Or the RP as a minotauar with the PCs tries to enter a very xenophobic prime world city in that those things are monsters. Some backwater, low magic village on a prime world would not be like Sigil, Union, or even Waterdeep where such sights may be a bit more common.

I think instead of the "my world" stuff, I would be more about turning down a concept due to relative power level. Yes, I am open to letting folks play dragons. But, it is no fun to the other players if everyone else is playing the level 1 apprentice rogue or wizard and one person has an ancient red dragon with class levels!

I also have a sneaking suspicion the whole DM "my world, my rules" thing helped contribute to the decline of pnp RPGs at a lot of public venues when the players just wanted something reasonably cool.

Let's shun the problem primadonna campaign destroying players, not the template.

Hell yeah. I get a good player out of the deal that just happens to want a Minotaur and I can give him what he wants within the power level of the story, I give it to them. Fun> anal settings. Plus, it keeps me on my toes and makes me a better DM. I am NOT a leader or curator or whatever. The players are there to help me create the story. I am merely a MMO server that creates bad guys, keeps things moving, and tries to create a sandbox with cool things and characters to interact with. That way, they come back.

 

[Evandis]

Let's shun the problem primadonna campaign destroying players, not the template.

Let's not ignore something very important here, there is a lot of truth to it being the player not the template, of course that is neglecting the other side of the same coin, a certain type of player is attracted to this template. That speaks volumes for the template and explains without a doubt why a lot of DMs don't want another Drizzt clone in the campaign. Not to mention it gets boring for us when we see no variation, and we are just as important as the player, our fun matters and the players tell the half of the story for us to discover and get excited about.

Now I never said I banned the template, as some people here seem to assume was part of the initial comment I made. I said I was sick of it, can't get sick of something you never see due to you not allowing it.

 

[Green1]

Now I never said I banned the template, as some people here seem to assume was part of the initial comment I made. I said I was sick of it, can't get sick of something you never see due to you not allowing it.

Point taken. Plus a lot of it is probably a bit of fatigue I had from long ago as there were a lot of DMs back in the day who were overly anal. The player base of that time hated them, but since no one DMed they bounced from one anal DM to the other.Of course irrelevent now. And, in a way I may need to thank them. Because they were the way they were back in the day, their games fell apart until I was nominated to DM even though I did not know jack. Fast forward 20 years, I guess I should thank them - the anal DMs. Made great friends I would have never met up until this very day. And you know what? When I was teaching my daughter DnD, she wanted to play a solo as an ancient amethyst dragon. I let her. And spread the love for pnps to the next generation now that she is a teenager.

But, from hearing around, I still hear those DMs still gather along with the primadonna players in some kind of abyss world of campaigns that fall apart weekly because no one else will take them. A match made in heaven, don't you think?

 

[Evandis]

But, from hearing around, I still hear those DMs still gather along with the primadonna players in some kind of abyss world of campaigns that fall apart weekly because no one else will take them. A match made in heaven, don't you think?

The problem, more so in the past, is finding 4-6 people who can meet up once a week regularly AND enjoy role-playing limits your options. The pool to pick from players is very small and sometimes you are willing to just deal with that which annoys you because some gaming is better than none. I can recall one specific player, who is still my friend today but will not be asked back to my table. He was a special snowflake Drizzt clone to a T, I mean every single game, there was zero variation, his background was most likely a xerox copy which he had 100s of to hand in every new adventure. Eventually I just started calling him Drizzt. As in "okay Drizzt it is your turn" and "What do you do Drizzt?"

He never got the point.

 

[Evandis]

I take that back, he did ad variation once, when he asked me if he could give up his pet panther so he could become a werepanther.

I let him. Sort of. I adjusted all his rolls and damage he gave me when he was a werepanther to that of when he was not. Then I let him discover he never was a werepanther, just susceptible to deep psychosis.

 

[Green1]

I take that back, he did ad variation once, when he asked me if he could give up his pet panther so he could become a werepanther.

I let him. Sort of. I adjusted all his rolls and damage he gave me when he was a werepanther to that of when he was not. Then I let him discover he never was a werepanther, just susceptible to deep psychosis.

That is just... wrong. But, I kind of like it. I do not blame you.

You have been horribly mind raped by special Dritzz wannabee attention hoarders for the mere love of the game and small pool of available, reliable players back then. Since there are no medals for the anguish issued by the DnD gods, I am glad you got just a small measure of therapy in return to an iconic badass warped into a Jar Jar Binks forever imprinted in your soul.

 

[jrowland]

First, I have never made my peace with it. Nope. Not going to, either.

I think what I finally "succumbed" to was the growing lack of new-blood/growth of the game and the increase in grognardism (I use that lightly, I am one). If I have to accept drow PCs for the growth and continuation of the game, so be it. My skin still crawls a little, but I can live with it...but like any evil DM, that's only until the player base is huge and strong and then...."DROW! KILL IT!"

As an aside, I was steeped in the culture of "DROW! KILL IT!", and it's hard for me not to shout that when I am a player and a drow PC shows up, lol!

 

[Nebulous]

Haha. Part of this makes me laugh. Ok, so I've had a player since 2e, he LOVES a character named Elgweth. He is an elf, a thief mage, dark and gritty and he actually personifies many aspects of the actual guy who plays him. This player has brought the same character and name and build into 2nd and 3rd and 4th and 5th edition. Not exclusively. He has played lots of other characters, but Elgweth always comes back. Elgweth dies sometimes. OR, he gets retired BEFORE he dies, because the player loves him, and...it is an extension of his own alter ego.

Killing that aspect of him would be...painful.

 

[Mercule]

I think instead of the "my world" stuff, I would be more about turning down a concept due to relative power level. Yes, I am open to letting folks play dragons. But, it is no fun to the other players if everyone else is playing the level 1 apprentice rogue or wizard and one person has an ancient red dragon with class levels!

I also have a sneaking suspicion the whole DM "my world, my rules" thing helped contribute to the decline of pnp RPGs at a lot of public venues when the players just wanted something reasonably cool.

Let's shun the problem primadonna campaign destroying players, not the template.

Hell yeah. I get a good player out of the deal that just happens to want a Minotaur and I can give him what he wants within the power level of the story, I give it to them. Fun> anal settings. Plus, it keeps me on my toes and makes me a better DM. I am NOT a leader or curator or whatever. The players are there to help me create the story. I am merely a MMO server that creates bad guys, keeps things moving, and tries to create a sandbox with cool things and characters to interact with. That way, they come back.

There's a balance. I've had plenty of players show up and say (implicitly) "Entertain us." I can do that, but there's a flip side: I expect to be entertained, as well. The whole group should be having fun.

I would (and have) run different settings. Even radically different settings. There are boundaries. I'm going to pick on Drizz't and PC drow, in general. My experience with them is that they just annoy me. Someone might sell me on an awesome concept, but it's going to have to be pretty fantastic before I'm going to consider it. If a "good DM" should be able to roll with it, then a "good player" should be have more than one concept.

And maybe that word "concept" is key. If I ask what your character is like, I'd expect a bit more than "a drow ranger with scimitars" or "kinda like Drizz't, but with whips" if you want me to tweak a setting for it. If "race+class" is the depth of your concept, I'm fine with that. Just do it within the established parameters.

Additionally, for a GM who does enjoy building a setting, asking to add in something incongruous is equivalent to asking that drow PC to deal with having tentacles instead of ears. Unless he's some sort of primadona, it really isn't all about him. Right?

I'm glad that you enjoy being a meatspace MMO. I genuinely think it's great you and your group like to play that way. That would drive me nuts and make me feel like GMing was a second job -- though I might play in that sort of game. I've always had a group, when I've wanted one, for 30+ years, so I don't think I'm doing anything wrong. Most of the time, I've had a hard time stepping down to be a player because people want me to GM. That doesn't make you wrong, either. It's just different styles and different social contracts for different groups.

I actually see more similarity between the player who feels like the GM should allow any concept (that isn't grossly overpowered for the system) just because he asked and the GM who makes the players watch her narrate conversations between two NPCs or tells the player "your character wouldn't do that, he'd do this". Either extreme is pretty selfish. There's a middle ground where both sides get something that falls within their definition of "fun", even if it isn't exactly their ideal; the social aspect makes up the difference.

FWIW, I actually really enjoy running small group or solo games (though I rarely get to). I enjoy it specifically because it gives me a chance to form a world around well-defined and interesting characters. Play what you want, and I'll make it work. But... the more people are mixed in, and the more the concepts = race + class, the harder that gets. Most often the unintentional compromise is that there are a couple strong roleplayers in the group and the world is built around them, with the other players being supporting cast or one-trick ponies. In this case, being a good GM means telling a good enough story for the observers and giving enough spotlight to the flat characters that neither group either notices or cares.

But... this could be a totally separate thread. The point is that it doesn't make someone a bad GM or player just because they don't want to see Drizz't in a module.

 

[Green1]

Well, if he was in a module, he would be a DMPC. Either that or a WoW style quest giver. Might as well put an exclamation mark over his head.

But, I wonder. If a Dwizzt DMPC and a Dwizzt special snowflake ever met, would this cause paradoxes of some sort?