Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bae'zel" data-source="post: 9746741" data-attributes="member: 7048197">Oh yes, by default any background flavor about ANY class should be wholly irrelevant to in-game play. I too, have witnessed a-hole DMs who played "GOTCHA" to Paladins....but that won't stop me from mining a player's choices in character creation (background, species and class) for story hooks, drama, faction alliances (or rivalries) and divine interest in these big epic heroes. Because I'm not an a-hole to my players and want them to have fun and acknowledge that their choices in character creation have meaning.Sure, I'll get players who could NOT care less about their choices during character creation. They just want to chuck dice and drink beer. Great! But I feel like they'll be missing out at my table. I've seen it happen: a player get a bit envious of the in-world ties another PC had to work with. A player who went all out to gain more favor with their deity or patron, and got rewards for doing so.So yeah, I guess that it makes sense: by default, D&D designers should say to DMs: "no character trait (background, species or class) should impose any in-fiction or mechanical limitations, complications or dramatic hooks if the player doesn't want to". I personally would not want to play with people who refuse that, despite my assurances of good faith.EDIT: I try to draw compelling hooks for ALL classes, not just Warlocks, unless the player is not interested at all, which would disappoint me and, to be frank, lose some interest in their character. To each their own etc...</blockquote>

Verification