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="Dire Bare" data-source="post: 8024243" data-attributes="member: 18182">I think trying to keep fidelity to a setting as written is a fool's quest. Restricting racial options in Mystara . . . because dammit that race doesn't currently exist in Mystara . . . is an attitude of "no" and exclusion I like to avoid in my games. But restricting racial options to achieve a specific theme, tone, or feel . . . that I can get behind and respect.Mystara doesn't really have a tight theme. It's a mish-mash of classic D&D tropes, silly humor, and D&D-but-different elements. Adding in classic tieflings, dragonborn or practically anything doesn't "break" the setting IMO. I'd have a hard time respecting a DM who told me, "Sorry, but you can't play a dragonborn as they don't exist in Mystara".Other campaign settings more closely try to emulate a specific sub-genre, tone, or feel, like Birthright, Ravenloft, and Dark Sun. Trying to pare down the character options to better model the campaign feel makes sense, although of course I think some DM's take it too far. A good DM always remembers that D&D is a collaborative game and will be open to player ideas . . . those too stuck on their precious campaign integrity, published or homebrew, are games I find less fun. On the flip-side, good players are open to the ideas of the DM and should be willing to give their campaign ideas an honest try.Any published setting is simply intended as a place for you to start, and D&D has always encouraged DM's to modify and customize published settings. Sticking to them as written just for the sake of respecting canon, bleh.</blockquote>

Verification