D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[Faolyn]

The werewolf and half-vampire-half-dragon were requests for a house rule from different people. My players can always ask for a new house rule or a change to an existing one and we'll discuss it, but I make the final call. It's as simple as that and as far as I can tell you are telling me that I play my game wrong.

OK, I think you're being a bit paranoid here because I did not say that at all.

I said that players and GMs can work together to create house rules. I'm taking it you disagree completely. That players can request something and GMs can veto or allow it, but GMs and players are incapable of brainstormng a new houserule together.

I do not want to put the players into the position of having go vote because that would make some people very uncomfortable and many would just vote "yes" to whatever was suggested so as to not come off as insulting. So I don't do that, no DM I've ever had has done that and in my opinion it's a better solution.

The players at my table are usually more than willing to compromise and build on others' ideas. I fail to see how that's a worse solution than what you use. I can see how it would be a different solution, but a worse one?

As far as what @Micah Sweet may or may not have said, I don't care. I'm not Micah and I don't follow or remember every conversation in a thread with more than 20,000 comments.

Going back two or three posts in the chain to see if you've missed something is hardly remembering 20,000+ posts.

 

[AlViking]

OK, I think you're being a bit paranoid here because I did not say that at all.

I said that players and GMs can work together to create house rules. I'm taking it you disagree completely. That players can request something and GMs can veto or allow it, but GMs and players are incapable of brainstormng a new houserule together.


The players at my table are usually more than willing to compromise and build on others' ideas. I fail to see how that's a worse solution than what you use. I can see how it would be a different solution, but a worse one?


Going back two or three posts in the chain to see if you've missed something is hardly remembering 20,000+ posts.

I've given examples of what some people wanted as house rules. I've explained why I do what I do. I don't care one way or another what you or anyone else do. I am not going to discuss what a third party did or did not say.

I see no value in continuing to discuss this.

 

[Faolyn]

The werewolf and half-vampire-half-dragon were requests for a house rule from different people.

New post because I hit send too soon and don't feel like editing that one.

I also disagree that's a house rule. It's a player race option. Depending on what edition you play, they may even be completely "legal" to play. 3x had those ECLs and all the templates, for instance, and 3x and 5e both have shifters, which can easily be reskinned as a werewolf. What you're doing is deciding what options are available as PC races, not choosing a house rule.

A house rule is defined as "unofficial modifications to official game rules adopted by individual groups of players." D&D's rules don't say what races are or are not allowed in the game; they just give the stats to the most common ones used throughout the editions.

 

[AlViking]

New post because I hit send too soon and don't feel like editing that one.

I also disagree that's a house rule. It's a player race option. Depending on what edition you play, they may even be completely "legal" to play. 3x had those ECLs and all the templates, for instance, and 3x and 5e both have shifters, which can easily be reskinned as a werewolf. What you're doing is deciding what options are available as PC races, not choosing a house rule.

A house rule is defined as "unofficial modifications to official game rules adopted by individual groups of players." D&D's rules don't say what races are or are not allowed in the game; they just give the stats to the most common ones used throughout the editions.

You don't consider a custom race a house rule? Race is not part of the rules of the game?

Okay. I do. Guess that's just one more thing we disagree on.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Of course you are. You seem to think even collectively, the typical player group is less trustworthy to make house rules decisions than a GM is. If you don't think that's badmouthing them, you've got a very privledged positon.



I think your approach infantalizes the players, and yeah, I don't find that a good thing to do. The fact it may have worked for you in no way changes that.

So your argument is that any disagreement with your position is "badmouthing" it?

 

[Micah Sweet]

And vice versa.


But does it mean that when you see someone talking about those preferences (or that you think you see it), that you should immediately jump in and say you don't like them?

No it doesn't, and if that was offensive to you I apologize.

 

[Shades of Eternity]

at this point the conservatism is summed up for me as follows.

Apparently, there are 3 basic rules about D&D
1. Never let a lady called Williams in charge of your company.,
2. Gary isn't allowed to leave the house...he ends up with hookers and blow,
3. Dave needed Grammarly.

 

[AlViking]

So your argument is that any disagreement with your position is "badmouthing" it?

No, I'm badmouthing my players because I acknowledge that a small percentage will push the envelope on acceptable house rules. That, and many people if asked to vote would feel uncomfortable telling someone no.

Mostly I just view it as a way to denigrate my opinion because I disagree.

 

[Hussar]

The players' main sub-agenda is to not lose, based on whatever loss conditions the game has.

That is so not my sub-agenda. My sub-agenda is to create an interesting story through my characters. I want my characters to suffer. I want my characters to LOSE. And that's the problem with the presumption that players don't want to lose. I want my character to lose all the time. But, in D&D, that almost never happens because for most DM's the only lose state is death of the character and the end of the story. So, for most DM's, a campaign is a never ending series of successes. Mostly because D&D has no other methods in the system for losses that aren't death.

 

[Umbran]

Mod Note:
Folks should consider exactly how vehement they want to make their replies in this thread, as some of you are getting very close to making things personal or otherwise actionable.