D&D General The Importance of Page 33

[S'mon]

I agree, but on the other hand:

If you pitch your setting and none of the players want to use the options contained in the pitched setting, you didn't pitch it well. If you got players to really buy in to what you're trying to do and what's cool about the setting, then they should want to work within/alongside it.

In other words, if 1/5 players isn't going along with the idea, it's that player. If 4/5 don't want to go along with the idea, it's either you or the idea itself.

It pretty much goes without saying that if no players like your pitched setting, you better change your pitch/pitch something else!

I've put a lot of effort into finding a campaign that'll suit several players with highly varied tastes (eg my 13 year old son Bill & my friend Kimberly like different things, but they both like dragons, so I chose Odyssey of the Dragonlords for a future campaign), if I want them all in the one game. OTOH I also run games to suit me, finding the players that fit.

 

[Oofta]

If they do so for you, then fair enough, but it’s not actually hard at all to have lore, culture, or depth behind each of a couple dozen races.

Part of it is the history of the world, I don't retcon things very often, if ever. That, along with personal preference, having an understanding of regional politics and how PCs have affected it, how can you have a sizable population of X without every PC of X being the last of the kind and so on all matter to me. I don't even have very many monstrous humanoid varieties running around in any one region.

If my campaigns were disconnected stand-alone campaigns I'd probably have less of an issue. I've even enjoyed playing the oddball races now and then in public games. So if you want every race under the sun, that's awesome. I could be perfectly happy with an all human campaign because the personality and story matter more than the meat suit.

 

[Fenris-77]

I agree, but on the other hand:

If you pitch your setting and none of the players want to use the options contained in the pitched setting, you didn't pitch it well. If you got players to really buy in to what you're trying to do and what's cool about the setting, then they should want to work within/alongside it.

In other words, if 1/5 players isn't going along with the idea, it's that player. If 4/5 don't want to go along with the idea, it's either you or the idea itself.

Or maybe the pitch just sucked. Always a possibility. Session zero and campaign pitches are very much a democratic process, or they should be, IMO. The players need to discuss things and work toward a consensus about playing or not. In a group of reasonable adults, the 1/5 player shouldn't be an issue. Either she'd agree to play because the rest of the group wanted to, or something could be added to the setting or pitch that's of interest to her specifically in order to garner buy-in.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Or maybe the pitch just sucked. Always a possibility. Session zero and campaign pitches are very much a democratic process, or they should be, IMO. The players need to discuss things and work toward a consensus about playing or not. In a group of reasonable adults, the 1/5 player shouldn't be an issue. Either she'd agree to play because the rest of the group wanted to, or something could be added to the setting or pitch that's of interest to her specifically in order to garner buy-in.

You're right - I definitely understated the importance of pitching the idea well - the most common mistake being a long description of what the players can't do.

 

[Fenris-77]

You're right - I definitely understated the importance of pitching the idea well - the most common mistake being a long description of what the players can't do.

For sure. It's Sales 101, accentuate the positive, soft-pedal the negative. I want my players to be excited about the possibilities, not irked by the limitations.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I agree, but on the other hand:

If you pitch your setting and none of the players want to use the options contained in the pitched setting, you didn't pitch it well. If you got players to really buy in to what you're trying to do and what's cool about the setting, then they should want to work within/alongside it.

In other words, if 1/5 players isn't going along with the idea, it's that player. If 4/5 don't want to go along with the idea, it's either you or the idea itself.

how can you have a sizable population of X without every PC of X being the last of the kind and so on all matter to me.

This is the part where I have trouble seeing what your point of view even is, much less understanding it.

I could be perfectly happy with an all human campaign because the personality and story matter more than the meat suit.

So, do you not see how this implies that having more available races make the game mostly about the "meat suit", or is that just genuinely what you're trying to say? The appropriate response depends entirely on which is the case.

 

[Oofta]

This is the part where I have trouble seeing what your point of view even is, much less understanding it.

Minimum Viable Population basically means that you need a decent number of members of a species for survival. Typically you need at least 500 to 1,000 for terrestrial vertebrates or depending on various circumstances up to 5,000. I'd say in a campaign world as dangerous as most, it could be even higher for most PC races because entire cities can be wiped out practically overnight.

All of which assumes of course that they regularly get together and mix genetically. But it's also of course that I run a game with a more "traditional" feel. There's no one right way.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Minimum Viable Population basically means that you need a decent number of members of a species for survival. Typically you need at least 500 to 1,000 for terrestrial vertebrates or depending on various circumstances up to 5,000. I'd say in a campaign world as dangerous as most, it could be even higher for most PC races because entire cities can be wiped out practically overnight.

All of which assumes of course that they regularly get together and mix genetically. But it's also of course that I run a game with a more "traditional" feel. There's no one right way.

Ah, okay, and your game world has enough of the map filled that it would be hard to put a sizeable population of a new people in a known part of the world?

I guess I also don't really play dnd with the assumption that whole towns get wiped out with any real frequency, so that will create different assumptions and perspectives.

 

[Helldritch]

I do not think that this is a question of a map filled to the maximum but rather a question of continuity. Refusing to add more races can be justified in many ways, the gods are not the least of them. Especially in a world with only one pantheon. The gods are perfectly able and willing to prevent planar travel for a large size population or a single person if it suits their fancy.

 

[Oofta]

Ah, okay, and your game world has enough of the map filled that it would be hard to put a sizeable population of a new people in a known part of the world?

I guess I also don't really play dnd with the assumption that whole towns get wiped out with any real frequency, so that will create different assumptions and perspectives.

Yeah, as much as I complain about FR's silliness and resetting the world every other year there have been a couple of apocalyptic level events in the world's history. I also do have major areas mapped out based on something I doodled back in high school with colored pencils.

My campaign world is a pretty dangerous place. Not only does that mean that towns and small cities occasionally get destroyed (it's rare, but it adds up) but people would be incredibly paranoid about someone walking around of a race that was never seen before. So I could see there being dragonborn on another continent, but if it got shipwrecked on shore it would likely be mistaken for a half-dragon created by the would-be dragon emperor and shot on sight. A horrible thing to do, but I think it would also be realistic.

That and all those orcs, hill giants and other monsters need somewhere to live.