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

[M_Natas]

This is the nub of the issue. Some players also may or may not want those things. The DM’s role is different to the players’ role, but that does not make them, or their personal tastes, more important than any of the other participants in the game.

Read the rest of the post, maybe? I apply that to DM-players and PC-Players.

And if anyone has a red line that is incompatible, he can't play with the person who wants to cross that red line.

 

[Mecheon]

That's the player defining the world. Players have all sorts of autonomy, opportunity and ability to change the world - through the actions of their characters. This isn't exactly new, it's a foundational assumption to how D&D works and always has been. Different groups are of course open to change that assumption.

Its hardly the player defining the world if its something that's already happened in game. If your adventures help lizardfolk, which is one of the most stock D&D plotlines to the point they invented Lizard Kings in previous editions to serve purely for that plotline, and it even shows up in Ghosts of Saltmarsh, and then want to play as them, what is stopping them from a storyline perspective? They've changed the world through their actions

It's about vision and world building, typically not about an issue with any specific species.

If other humanoids like lizardfolk exist in the setting, then they should be able to become adventurers. That's the whole point of playing a tabletop RPG compared to just booting up Skyrim, far more freedom to do what you want rather than being stopped by the limits of the game

I get why I can't have a Lizardfolk adventurer in Neverwinter Nights (well, I technically can but it hasn't been updated in over 20 years and most people prefer the later Lizardman model over the vanilla one), yet people managed to hook weimics into that game

 

[tetrasodium]

Its hardly the player defining the world if its something that's already happened in game. If your adventures help lizardfolk, which is one of the most stock D&D plotlines to the point they invented Lizard Kings in previous editions to serve purely for that plotline, and it even shows up in Ghosts of Saltmarsh, and then want to play as them, what is stopping them from a storyline perspective? They've changed the world through their actions


If other humanoids like lizardfolk exist in the setting, then they should be able to become adventurers. That's the whole point of playing a tabletop RPG compared to just booting up Skyrim, far more freedom to do what you want rather than being stopped by the limits of the game

I get why I can't have a Lizardfolk adventurer in Neverwinter Nights (well, I technically can but it hasn't been updated in over 20 years and most people prefer the later Lizardman model over the vanilla one), yet people managed to hook weimics into that game

Are you unclear on the difference between Player Characters & Non-Player Character?

 

[AlViking]

Its hardly the player defining the world if its something that's already happened in game. If your adventures help lizardfolk, which is one of the most stock D&D plotlines to the point they invented Lizard Kings in previous editions to serve purely for that plotline, and it even shows up in Ghosts of Saltmarsh, and then want to play as them, what is stopping them from a storyline perspective? They've changed the world through their actions


If other humanoids like lizardfolk exist in the setting, then they should be able to become adventurers. That's the whole point of playing a tabletop RPG compared to just booting up Skyrim, far more freedom to do what you want rather than being stopped by the limits of the game

I get why I can't have a Lizardfolk adventurer in Neverwinter Nights (well, I technically can but it hasn't been updated in over 20 years and most people prefer the later Lizardman model over the vanilla one), yet people managed to hook weimics into that game

Lizardfolk don't exist in my world. Goblins do for example, but as part of the world lore the vast majority evil (truly evil ones become more powerful goblinoids).they are not an accepted part of society.

But it doesn't really matter. I could find a reason to add Klingons. It's all fiction. I don't want to add any more species outside of my curated list. I like the look and feel of my world how it works and my players like it too. There's no pent up demand to play lizardmen, goblins or Klingons. Not even tortles.

 

[Flying Toaster]

I must say I am a bit baffled by some of the more extreme opinions expressed in this thread.

As a DM it is “my way or the highway”? You can make that stick if you are the only DM in the area, but as soon as someone more mellow and agreeable comes along, players may well jump ship. And of course there are many games available to those willing to play online. “I have to play a tortle, and I have to play one right now” vs. “No wacky animal people in MY game - Tolkien races only!”. Why not take turns? Play the game the DM has already prepared now, and later the DM could make a whole new campaign set in a magical cypress wetland. The players could choose from any number of reptilian and amphibian species well suited to the setting.

Homebrew settings and adventures of any kind are red flags for control freak DMs? If that attitude had been common in the 70’s, D&D and the entire RPG hobby could never have existed in the first place. Not liking the Forgotten Realms or Eberron is a red flag for a player - seriously? We are only allowed to play existing corporate IPs, and anyone who dislikes them for any reason is a bad player and/or DM? No new settings or adventures unless you buy them from a subsidiary of a toy conglomerate? I do think there is value in playing and running published settings and adventures, which allow people to take part in a shared experience across space and time. Think of all the anecdotes people have told here about their youthful exploits playing B1, B2, X1, and so on, and all of the people revisiting and reworking those old settings and modules. But there has to be room for individual creativity, which is the best part of this hobby.

I can see interesting possibilities for players collaborating with the DM to build a setting, but there also should be room for exploration, mysteries to solve, NPC factions to interact with, etc. If the DM has everything planned out in advance, that is indeed a railroad, or a guided tour of a museum. But if the players have huge back stories and arcs for their characters planned out in advance, that seems (to me) to be not so much a game as something akin to a stage play or a serialized prestige TV show. Real game play is most likely to occur when neither the DM nor the players really know what is going to happen when the rubber (or boot leather?) hits the road.

 

[Mecheon]

Are you unclear on the difference between Player Characters & Non-Player Character?

Of course I'm aware of the difference. However, you're in an RPG. You're able to, you know, influence the world and get other options to become playable. Rewards for player success

World of Warcraft, an MMO restricted by needing to adjust approximately 5,000 helmet and shoulderpad models every time it adds a new race into the game, has "You help out a group of people and end up being able to roll them" as a regular thing to the point we all speculate on what new ones we'll get this time around. I would like to think your D&D session has a bit more player freedom than an MMO that has to support two factions so cannot have any big, lasting changes to the world if they don't want endless complaints from the one second off

Lizardfolk don't exist in my world. Goblins do for example, but as part of the world lore the vast majority evil (truly evil ones become more powerful goblinoids).they are not an accepted part of society.

But it doesn't really matter. I could find a reason to add Klingons. It's all fiction. I don't want to add any more species outside of my curated list. I like the look and feel of my world how it works and my players like it too. There's no pent up demand to play lizardmen, goblins or Klingons. Not even tortles.

I'd argue a point that adventurers really aren't an accepted part of society to boot along with that. That's why they're adventurers. Someone who's an accepted part of society is rarely the person regularly leaving society to take up monster slaying as their main career path. The people who just seemingly fit into society aren't the ones who become adventurers

And are you really sure there's no desire? Lizardmen aren't even that exotic of a race, someone's probably got a vague lizardman idea they've got in the back pocket.

 

[tetrasodium]

Of course I'm aware of the difference. However, you're in an RPG. You're able to, you know, influence the world and get other options to become playable. Rewards for player success

World of Warcraft, an MMO restricted by needing to adjust approximately 5,000 helmet and shoulderpad models every time it adds a new race into the game, has "You help out a group of people and end up being able to roll them" as a regular thing to the point we all speculate on what new ones we'll get this time around. I would like to think your D&D session has a bit more player freedom than an MMO that has to support two factions so cannot have any big, lasting changes to the world if they don't want endless complaints from the one second off


I'd argue a point that adventurers really aren't an accepted part of society to boot along with that. That's why they're adventurers. Someone who's an accepted part of society is rarely the person regularly leaving society to take up monster slaying as their main career path. The people who just seemingly fit into society aren't the ones who become adventurers

And are you really sure there's no desire? Lizardmen aren't even that exotic of a race, someone's probably got a vague lizardman idea they've got in the back pocket.

I think that between @AlViking and myself you run into both problems with your whole line of what ifs. Im his game you can't help lizardmen because they don't exist and and the whole chain is a case of a player trying to define the world as some kind of co-ghost writer abusing the d&d game being run by expecting it to function as some kind of primary writer dancing at the player's direction. He's already posted about that but if add that you start talking about a playable race and switch to assisting NPCs of that race, the original distinction and casual naughty word keeps everything he wrote relevant to my games because there are other races and communities that don't exist and are things I don't want to add or move from NPC race to playable race§

Lizardmen exist in my game, but not salt marsh and their culture is already defined to a significant degree, that causes a bunch of problems for the player expecting your example chain of events... Those problems are things like the fact that players can say "can we maybe find a village of lizardmen and help them", but that village is likely to be in qbarra with totally different things going on compared to wherever the game had been building up and I'm gonna need a bit more reason on why Bob as a player wants to suddenly jettison everything that the party has built up if qbarra is in its normal state of not being significantly involved in the events elsewhere in khorvaire. If qbarra IS involved though and some hypothetical lizardmen are helped your example still presents a serious problem of expectations from a player wanting to react to events with their PC and set thingsin motion with the actions of their PC in addition to defining the outcome of those actions down to a single NPC making specific choices m.... Seriously that expectation is so far outside the realm of a thing granted to players that I think it was more likely an example to justify using hypothetical NPCs to justify bootstrapping a specific§ playable race& it feels a bit like a disingenuous effort by a player to pressure their gm into granting it while avoiding discussion with the gm over actually doing so with a localized pc


§ I once had a player tell me something like "since monsters are people I wanted to ask. I found a playable succubus race on d&beyond, can I play">No. I have so little interest in allowing a playable succubus that it wasn't even a matter that needed me to look at the thing he found.

 

[Mecheon]

I think that between @AlViking and myself you run into both problems with your whole line of what ifs. Im his game you can't help lizardmen because they don't exist and and the whole chain is a case of a player trying to define the world as some kind of co-ghost writer abusing the d&d game being run by expecting it to function as some kind of primary writer dancing at the player's direction. He's already posted about that but if add that you start talking about a playable race and switch to assisting NPCs of that race, the original distinction and casual naughty word keeps everything he wrote relevant to my games because there are other races and communities that don't exist and are things I don't want to add or move from NPC race to playable race§

I'm talking a post event thing. 'Lizardmen' can be substituted for any non 'four humans, elves, dwarves and gnomes' race that the party helps out. You're not asking beforehand, you've done something to help them out in-game previously. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that one player's character has died and they're looking to reroll. They died helping out this town or village of something that isn't the stock 3.5e races. Doesn't matter what it is, just it isn't a stock 3.5e race. Could be anything. Lizardmen are just a common and simple enough option that are inoffensive. Could be a satyr. A centaur. Standard, regular races with a long history in the game

Does it not make more sense, from a storyline and player perspective, that one of those people they've helped come and join their adventurer, rather than "Oh, we went down the road and Fingus McHarfoot the halfling was there, guess we're having him come along rather than these people we helped"? Which one seems better to you, a character coming from player choices, or a new character just being quantum ogred into the next town or pathway because gotta meet up somehow?

Lizardmen exist in my game, but not salt marsh and their culture is already defined to a significant degree, that causes a bunch of problems for the player expecting your example chain of events... Those problems are things like the fact that players can say "can we maybe find a village of lizardmen and help them", but that village is likely to be in qbarra with totally different things going on compared to wherever the game had been building up and I'm gonna need a bit more reason on why Bob as a player wants to suddenly jettison everything that the party has built up if qbarra is in its normal state of not being significantly involved in the events elsewhere in khorvaire. If qbarra IS involved though and some hypothetical lizardmen are helped your example still presents a serious problem of expectations from a player wanting to react to events with their PC and set thingsin motion with the actions of their PC in addition to defining the outcome of those actions down to a single NPC making specific choices m.... Seriously that expectation is so far outside the realm of a thing granted to players that I think it was more likely an example to justify using hypothetical NPCs to justify bootstrapping a specific§ playable race& it feels a bit like a disingenuous effort by a player to pressure their gm into granting it while avoiding discussion with the gm over actually doing so with a localized pc

We are specifically talking about a mid-game example where the party has already interacted with this village. They're already nearby Lizardfolk Village and have helped them in some manner. So, yeah, localisation isn't an issue

§ I once had a player tell me something like "since monsters are people I wanted to ask. I found a playable succubus race on d&beyond, can I play">No. I have so little interest in allowing a playable succubus that it wasn't even a matter that needed me to look at the thing he found.

The D&D beyond succubus is hardly the worst when DNDwiki stuff exists. Its maybe a bit strong but everything it has sort of fits into the general zeitgeist.

Planescape: Torment had a succubus party member, of course that's gonna be on people's minds. Its just a generally popular option for that side of things, even before we get to Grace existing and being a succubus cleric

 

[AlViking]

Of course I'm aware of the difference. However, you're in an RPG. You're able to, you know, influence the world and get other options to become playable. Rewards for player success

World of Warcraft, an MMO restricted by needing to adjust approximately 5,000 helmet and shoulderpad models every time it adds a new race into the game, has "You help out a group of people and end up being able to roll them" as a regular thing to the point we all speculate on what new ones we'll get this time around. I would like to think your D&D session has a bit more player freedom than an MMO that has to support two factions so cannot have any big, lasting changes to the world if they don't want endless complaints from the one second off


I'd argue a point that adventurers really aren't an accepted part of society to boot along with that. That's why they're adventurers. Someone who's an accepted part of society is rarely the person regularly leaving society to take up monster slaying as their main career path. The people who just seemingly fit into society aren't the ones who become adventurers

And are you really sure there's no desire? Lizardmen aren't even that exotic of a race, someone's probably got a vague lizardman idea they've got in the back pocket.

I've always told people they can ask. One player over the past decade plus mention casually they probably would have run a drow instead of an elf. Maybe they'd like to play a loxodon someday but they're perfectly happy running a gnome or any one of the other half dozen species.

Species isn't that important to a lot of people especially now that it's no longer tied to your ability score adjustments.

It may be an issue for you which is why you would know it and a few other things about my game before we even have a session 0.