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

[soviet]

Which sounds quite arrogant and presumptuous that you know what I and my players want more than we do.

The hypothetical example only comes up because someone in your group wants to play a turtlechap. The assumption is therefore that they are known to you and already on board with your game's premise and lore etc, they just want to add something to it, and presumably (if they are as familiar with the lore as you say) they have an idea of how it could be explained. It's an assumption that the player is acting in good faith.

I agree that if random strangers approach you in the street and shout 'Tortleman?' you should keep walking.

 

[TwoSix]

Not if they cannot interact with the setting as designed they arent.

Man, I wish I had the time to waste designing a setting that doesn't even have players yet.

 

[tetrasodium]

That "rando" is one of your players.

Soooo? Randos are still randos. Sometimes possible player is still just a rando who hasn't yet cleared the bar to become a player.

I guess.... Remember that not every prospective player clears the bar needed to be considered a player or show up and expect to be treated like a player

 

[soviet]

And if you have mature, capable, intelligent players (and by gum, reading this thread, I realize I'm privileged to have fourof them), they will recognize that.

Why are your mature, capable, intelligent players asking for something that is obviously not a good fit for your campaign? Wouldn't your assumption be 'well, let's hear them out and see if we can make it work'?

 

[Scribe]

Man, I wish I had the time to waste designing a setting that doesn't even have players yet.

Its easy, 15 min here, 15 min there, over time? Not hard at all.

I don't have cable or binge stream though, so its not that hard to get a bit of time in if one chooses.

 

[soviet]

All good, I probably have the largest ignore list on the forum.

I'll permit you to remain visible, maybe you'll come around to the correct answer that my world building efforts matter more than some rando's desire to play a Dragonborn.

Why are you playing with 'some rando' in the first place?

 

[Scribe]

Why are you playing with 'some rando' in the first place?

Thats the hypothetical. You put out a message that you are looking to run a game, and prospective players indicate their interest.

If they are ready to play within the framework provided? Great. If they are not, then thanks but no thanks rando, get on board or find another game.

 

[Umbran]

I think that's an oversimplification.

Pretty much all discussions of GM vs player entitlement become oversimplifications, because nobody ever wants nuance - they just want to be right.

Such conversations generally drive to extremes, in which characters get lynched rather than get charged a little extra in the shops, and players massacre entire villages without having notable consequences for those actions.

My suggesting that both sides need to be able to trust each other seems rather less oversimplification than that.

.... have dramatically granted players the impression that they can do what the gm is still largely expected to avoid doing by social contract fairness and rules. themselves

I thought we were arguing over Jimmy wanting to play a tortle. You're... kind of far afield from that here.

 

[soviet]

Man, I wish I had the time to waste designing a setting that doesn't even have players yet.

You will have even less time when you become an elected official.

But, actually, it's easy. You just write out a list of all the things you don't want, including 'player input'.

 

[TwoSix]

I agree in that I think more players today want that than the alternative.

I mean, if the alternative is "Play a human fighter with nothing but the stuff in my pack", than I would play OSE or Cairn or Knave or any of the myriad OSR/NSR systems that make such an experience actually gamable and enjoyable.