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

[Maxperson]

I was attempting to have a conversation. That's how conversations work, I come up with an idea, it you don't like it you come up with a counter-proposal.

This.

"A PC who looks like a tortle doesn't work, but you can be X" is the beginning of the conversation. It's generally followed up, "Well X doesn't work for me, because of Y, how about Z?"

 

[Maxperson]

I’ve already suggested several. I am a natural turtle changed my magic,

This is a tortle.

I am from another plane of existence,

This is a tortle.

I was a spelljammer until my ship crashed,

This is a tortle.

I am a human part-transformed into a turtle by magic

This is a tortle.

All of those are not a compromise on "A tortle as it is in the book doesn't work in the setting." They are just reasons why you are an uncompromising tortle.

That is still tortle or nothing.

 

[Maxperson]

The real answer here seems to be, that some DMs believe their world building is worth being selective with their players. Meaning some are more willing to lose some number of potential players to raise their own fun. Players do this all the time in reverse, when they don't play with just any DM for various reasons.

Actually, I think it suggests that people in real life are more reasonable than people posting on a forum. I've never met a person so stuck on a single race that they would leave the game, or not have tons of fun staying as a different character(whether compromise or fully different).

I don't think a willingness to lose players plays into most DM decisions of this nature.

 

[AlViking]

This.

"A PC who looks like a tortle doesn't work, but you can be X" is the beginning of the conversation. It's generally followed up, "Well X doesn't work for me, because of Y, how about Z?"

A PC who looks like a tortle apparently only works if they actually are a tortle for some people.

 

[AlViking]

Actually, I think it suggests that people in real life are more reasonable that people posting on a forum. I've never met a person so stuck on a single race that they would leave the game, or not have tons of fun staying as a different character(whether compromise or fully different).

I don't think a willingness to lose players plays into most DM decisions of this nature.

Yeah, I have never hit this in real life, much less the vehement assertions that if I don't allow every species under the sun that players have no autonomy to do anything. The hyperbole has been strong on this thread.

Even the guy who wanted to play the werewolf just ended up playing a different race.

 

[Scribe]

I've lost the plot on if Tortle means anything at this point.

 

[Maxperson]

I will give you credit then. You are devoted to your vision and not simply interested in limiting PC options while keeping all your DM toys available. A rarity in this space. It takes a lot of willpower to ignore the latest player book AND monster manual.

And I will argue that it's neither a rarity, nor takes any willpower at all. I had two entire groups, one that I ran the game for(5 people), and one that I played in(10 people) who completely ignored every player book, DM book, and MM in 4e, all without using an ounce of willpower.

 

[Maxperson]

I've lost the plot on if Tortle means anything at this point.

Someone was looking for a soup recipe. Carry on.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

As I said, it's fine that he doesn't like the 2024 books and will continue to write things based on other books. I just dislike being lumped in with munchkins because I don't have the same issue he has.

Yeah, that sounds a bit... unlikeable, calling people out as munchkins (which seems to be used more as an insult, I don't really know anyone using the term positively, except maybe in fond memories of how silly they were back in the days or something) just because they like an edition he doesn't.

 

[Mecheon]

Not as bad as the Dumbo rip-off flying elephant dude in BG 3 (which I read somewhere that they put in as a joke), but still pretty silly. We all have preferences.

That was a Hollyphant. They're long-standing creature, they've been in every edition but 4E. Another Monster Manual 2 lineage

There was also the guy who said that if orcs were allowed for him to play, he would be doubtful that the DM allowed any freedoms anywhere else.

I stick by that. If you tell me half orcs are available but not orcs, I'm firstly going to check if I time travelled back in time, and secondly, not join your game because I can tell its not going to go well.

I've lost the plot on if Tortle means anything at this point.

Tortle is just a stand in for any inoffensive but slightly exotic race at this point. Its not one with potential storyline guff like Dragonborn, its not one with some potentially overpowered ability like Yuan-ti, its not one with mechanics that get some DMs worried like flight. Just a weird inoffensive guy that's around in other settings as a normal thing

Yeah, that sounds a bit... unlikeable, calling people out as munchkins (which seems to be used more as an insult, I don't really know anyone using the term positively, except maybe in fond memories of how silly they were back in the days or something) just because they like an edition he doesn't.

Frankly its ridiculous. You want to be a munchkin in D&D 5e? You pick a Half-Elf Moon Druid. Stock PHB. That's doing more damage than most anything 5.24e is putting out