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

[SableWyvern]

Again what is a character suited for an Arctic campaign anyway?

I have no idea, it was just a throw-away line someone used. The relevant part was that @GobHag made it clear they literally don't care what's suitable and would happily turn up with something they know for a fact is not suitable.

 

[Minigiant]

I have no idea, it was just a throw-away line someone used. The relevant part was that @GobHag made it clear they literally don't care what's suitable and would happily turn up with something they know for a fact is not suitable.

But if it isn't defined...@Gobhag doesn't have a sense of what is suitable.

If the instructions are unclear, why should they care about what is suitable?

That is how these things happen. Because the player shows up and get the ban list after they sit down.

 

[SableWyvern]

But if it isn't defined...@Gobhag doesn't have a sense of what is suitable.

If the instructions are unclear, why should they care about what is suitable?

That is how these things happen. Because the player shows up and get the ban list after they sit down.

That is not what the discussion was at all. @GobHag made it clear they do not care whether or not their character is suitable, and will happily show up with a character they know is not.

You've shifted the goal posts constantly throughout this thread, but doing so on behalf of a completely different poster is certainly a new one for me.

 

[GobHag]

But if it isn't defined...@Gobhag doesn't have a sense of what is suitable.

If the instructions are unclear, why should they care about what is suitable?

That is how these things happen. Because the player shows up and get the ban list after they sit down.

Of course I do, I chose lizardmen as an example specifically because I know that it'd be ridiculous to have a cold-blooded being in the arctic. I'd be willing to make excuses to make it fit to be polite; Migrant, Mercenary, Reptilian Indiana Jones, Punished By A God To Live In The Cold, but my main goal is always to play a character I like more than to better experience the setting.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

It's a reasonable question and one with a real experience already already in the thread back in 409. One of the posters pushing the It'S mY cHaReCtEr /nOt YoUr WoRlD side of the discussion where players☆ should not be expected to have any responsibility in fitting their character to the world/setting has already leapt in with the toxic 4e ECG quote & others with Keith's correction.

While thanks for going into it. You didn’t actually answer my question. Could I play a Dragonborn, Goliath, or Tortle?

 

[SableWyvern]

Of course I do, I chose lizardmen as an example specifically because I know that it'd be ridiculous to have a cold-blooded being in the arctic. I'd be willing to make excuses to make it fit to be polite; Migrant, Mercenary, Reptilian Indiana Jones, Punished By A God To Live In The Cold, but my main goal is always to play a character I like more than to better experience the setting.

I might not agree with your perspective (and I wonder if maybe you're trolling just a bit), but I at least respect you for standing by your position.

 

[billd91]

While thanks for going into it. You didn’t actually answer my question. Could I play a Dragonborn, Goliath, or Tortle?

I know you're not asking me but there is one campaign I would give you a hard no on playing a Dragonborn. And that's the Dragonlance setting. The draconians and their origin are too core and significant to the setting to muddle with another humanoid dragon species.

 

[Mecheon]

Dragonborn have not been around in playable form since 2E, what are you on about? Do you mean Draconians? They weren't playable until 3E! And even then "playable" is a stretch with the ridiculous Level Adjustment.

Dragonborn have the history of 'playable dragon-related people', so draconians are tied into their whole history. Probably also a bit of dragonkin as well though not much

Goliaths aren't "half-giants", they have a lot of accumulated lore as well as distinctive appearance which does not fit a lot of settings. And odd that you bring up halflings, since there's a core setting from all the way back in 1st edition which explicitly bans them!

The original goliath stats in 3.5e are just the 3e half giants with the psionics removed and replaced with mountain themed abilities. The giant flavoured abilities in 5.24 help add into that. They're absolutely half giants

 

[Scribe]

Dragonborn have the history of 'playable dragon-related people', so draconians are tied into their whole history.

Nah. Draconians are corrupted Dragon Eggs. Thats not Dragonborn at all.

 

[Remathilis]

Dragonborn have not been around in playable form since 2E, what are you on about? Do you mean Draconians? They weren't playable until 3E! And even then "playable" is a stretch with the ridiculous Level Adjustment.

Half-Dragon PCs For All Worlds Half-Dragon PCs For All Worlds

Behold! the 2e half-dragons from Council of Wyrms, expanded to other D&D settings.