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: 6401229" data-attributes="member: 6688277">Great idea. I like lots - I can see some fun in it. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />     No, not really. We were playing 4e Mystara and one of my players really wanted to play a Revenant. Well between myself as DM and him as player we worked something out regarding backstory for this character and included him in and that is not the only time I have done this. Of course I would like to say everything is possible - but sometimes their are hard limits the DM would like to impose for the setting and I think from my perspective it is unfair to chastise a DM for wanting to impose such limit for flavourful setting purposes.   I find that statement incredibly unfair. If I would like to run a political and nationalistic storyline within Karameikos and I make the restriction that I would like all the characters to either be human Traladaran or human Thyatians I should be able to without others calling for 'failure of imagination' Sure I can introduce elven and dwarvern characters into the storyline, but perhaps I don't want to as DM. Like I said before, these campaign ideas a proposed to the players beforehand so its not like its sprung on them and if they agree, well then it is ok. You seem to be ignoring that step completely.   It is not a question that one "can't" fit but that one "does not want to" fit. Staying true to setting, trying to play it in its natural state, authentic...and all that crap.I do not go to Sushi Restaurants and order burgers or pizza and if they do not serve me pizza or burger, I  tell them their  chef is unimaginative or that he is not trying very hard. The PHB is full of options. If the player can only be fully engaged with the KNOWN option/s that conflict/s with the agreed upon setting well then frankly I'd rather not have that player in my group. And as a player I would conform to the DM's prescribed setting, but I understand that is me.Despite this statement or hard line above that I have made - I generally work with the players, but I have also denied them when I felt that they were straying too far or selecting prohibited character concepts purely for mechanical reasons.Fair enough. I respect your position, despite that I do not agree with it. No worries.</blockquote>

Verification