NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sadras" data-source="post: 6401183" data-attributes="member: 6688277">I hear you, but....What if the players want to play Halflings in a Dragonlance setting? What if they want to play Kender in a Forgotten Realms setting? What is they want to play walking-talking Minotaurs in Karameikos/Mystara? What if they want to play a Warforged in Greyhawk? What I'm getting at is, when one selects a setting to play in, one has chosen it due to the distinct canon, lore, myth, races, geography, personalities, politics...etc.Would you not agree that it seems reasonable to afford the right for DMs to create their own settings, with lore, myth, races...etc since we already afford that right to published settings?  We certainly do not call the creators or the users of Greyhawk, Darksun, Eberon, FR, Ravenloft...settings  who are obviously fixated about the details of these campaign worlds, as "strong-arm DMs". I deem it a little unfair for players to demand such strong authorial roles (such as the inclusion of races) in unpublished settings just because they are not published.  Since you have currently mentioned that you will be playing in a Dragonlance setting, how will the request to play a warforged character sit with the DM? Just curious. I mean a DM can obviously pull it off, anything can be included, but I imagine there is also a certain level of respect/decorum for the setting - at least there is for me. Lastly, I'm fairly optimistic (perhaps foolishly so) that the majority of DMs first propose a campaign concept to their players along with all its various chargen restrictions for that setting and then the group decides if they are on board or not with the concept. It is generally not a surprised authoritarian limitation that is unleashed on the players.</blockquote>

Verification