D&D General The Monsters Know What They're Doing ... Are Unsure on 5e24

[Belen]

I don't see morality playing into this. As DM I need to be excited and engaged about the world I create for the players to interact with. I owe it to my players - all my players - to have logical consistency in the world and to have put thought into it. I'm not doing it because I'm a control freak, I'm doing it because I know that some of players appreciate that I put hard limits in and most don't care. If someone absolutely insists on playing a specific character that violates the handful of restrictions I've got then they shouldn't have accepted the invitation to join in the first place because I let people know up front what my limits are.

As DM I have a responsibility though to make the game as enjoyable as I know how for everyone at the table. Including me.

I wonder if the disconnect is that the players may not care about this stuff.

 

[saviirkad]

So again ... what is it about having established lore and feel to a campaign that "burns" a player if they can't play a species that doesn't exist in the world? Why is it a red flag that I have a preference that some people may not agree with?

Regardless of the position or role of the person involved, whether DM or player, whether it's about their choice of character or choice of setting tone, it will always be a red flag when one's own preference is given such precedence and priority that everyone else must adjust to suit it.

That does not make preferences bad.

 

[AlViking]

I wonder if the disconnect is that the players may not care about this stuff.

A lot of DMs don't seem to care either. We all play for different reasons and with different preferences.

 

[Minigiant]

"Many" is not the same as making literally anything as is because roleplaying. I'm still waiting for you to stop dodging the question from earlier and fill in details on the inverted stormwind mentioned in 1133 that you consistently seem to be expecting GMs to follow

I did say players should comes with a couple character ideas to the table once they are giving the campaign parameters and decide to play.

I will add that if you should likely leave if your 4th idea is shot down..

BUT as a DM I'd say the say. If half of your players are down to their 4th and 5th character pitch, you should switch settings or group. Either your setting is too narrow, the pitch was very unclear, or you and the players aren't a good fit.

 

[AlViking]

Regardless of the position or role of the person involved, whether DM or player, whether it's about their choice of character or choice of setting tone, it will always be a red flag when one's own preference is given such precedence and priority that everyone else must adjust to suit it.

That does not make preferences bad.

Why is it a red flag that I set limits as a DM? I'm making decisions constantly about what exists or does not exist in the campaign world.

If that means I'm not the DM for you, that's fine. But it has nothing to do with red flags.

 

[AlViking]

I did say players should comes with a couple character ideas to the table once they are giving the campaign parameters and decide to play.

I will add that if you should likely leave if your 4th idea is shot down..

BUT as a DM I'd say the say. If half of your players are down to their 4th and 5th character pitch, you should switch settings or group. Either your setting is too narrow, the pitch was very unclear, or you and the players aren't a good fit.

I tell you that I allow species X, Y and Z when I discuss my game. Am I "shooting down" character ideas or do you feel entitled to play something not on my list just because you're joining the game?

 

[Scott Christian]

Everyone, and I mean everyone, has limits as a DM and player. It's just where the line is drawn. That's it. That is the only difference.

 

[saviirkad]

Why is it a red flag that I set limits as a DM? I'm making decisions constantly about what exists or does not exist in the campaign world.

If that means I'm not the DM for you, that's fine. But it has nothing to do with red flags.

I presented a scenario, one where a single individual does not care about the interests or enjoyments of the others at their table.

I do not know you, I do not know how you run your games, how you interact with the others at your table, and nor will I know these things. So if your question is about whether or not that scenario presents you specifically as a red flag, that's up to you to determine. Do you prioritize your interests to the detriment of everyone else's?

If your answer is no, then this is a moot point, what I am talking about would seem to not apply to you.

 

[Minigiant]

I tell you that I allow species X, Y and Z when I discuss my game. Am I "shooting down" character ideas or do you feel entitled to play something not on my list just because you're joining the game?

Let's make it simple.

I'll be the player.

My First Choice of character is a Half Elf Fey wanderer Ranger
Second is a Goliath Barbarian

Third is a Kobold Sorcerer

Then a Drow Arcane Trickster

Last is a Human Rogue

Am I entitled to think that I should believe that I should be able to play one of those, something like those*, or be convinced by the DM that although all of those are bad there is fun to be had?

*assuming I reveal my reason why I want to play it or the DM asks

 

[SableWyvern]

I think this example highlights the disconnect between the "sides" here. It's not the only post to do so, just not interested in quote chaining them all. This is not a criticism of you, Belen, or the example you give here, as you are rightfully and simply expressing a lived experience.

But with regards to the broader conversation, the pushback from the "DM side" of things seems to center on wanting to counter problematic playstyles with an indiscriminate fix that burns the players who are not there to steal the spotlight or to pursue mechanics, they're just there to enjoy the game like everyone else.

This conversation ultimately just feels like looping around and around the perception of red flags in either the player or the DM corner, a conversation without resolution often because so many will force the other's response into being a bad faith interpretation.

From my perspective, the pushback from both sides often highlights real red flags within their own corners. When the positions become as intractable and universal as many of those shared here, those are huge red flags in my opinion. It's a 'my way or the highway' attitude, and whether it's from the DM or the player, it suggests continued problems down the line even if there's concession from the other. And I think a large reason for why it's being so often disregarded within one's own corner is that we can get so precious about what we do or create that we don't even realize when we've crossed the line.

Of course, by the nature of the internet and this being an online forum, I do acknowledge that just because the positions are often presented as intractable and universal doesn't mean that's true in actual practice.

I believe that I was the one who originally raised the issue @Belen mentions and, just to be clear, I don't see any reason to assume that a player who wants to play something strange is doing so because they want to hijack the campaign or steal the spotlight. This is simply something that can end up being an unintended consequence -- things out of the ordinary, just by the their nature, tend to stand out.

If someone plays a mage in a world where mages are rare and hunted, then the group is likely to spend a lot of the time lurking and fleeing and sneaking their mage about to keep themselves safe. If someone plays a cold-blooded creature in an arctic campaign, the group may need to take greater steps than usual to ensure that character stays warm and potentially plan around situations in which it's not feasible for that character to act normally. If a PC is going to be the only tortle anyone in the campaign area has ever seen, they are likely to be the constant centre of attention and interest.

None of those things are necessarily wrong, and they can, in fact, add a great deal to play if everyone is on board. But there are times when people haven't signed on for and simply aren't interested in a game that focuses on Timmy the Tortle and his eccentric entourage.