Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
The Power of "NO". Banned Races and Classes?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Kobold Stew" data-source="post: 6337812" data-attributes="member: 23484"><p>Yes, it seems I'm in this minority as well. </p><p></p><p>I'm finding the whole conversation fascinating. I understand DMs wanting to ban things because they genuinely believe that it is mechanically broken. Very few of the comments in this thread of of that class, however. The majority (self-selected, admittedly) do like to ban their players playing things, because of the personal taste of the DM ("I don't like/hate x"). </p><p></p><p>This is completely foreign to my experience as a player, and consequently as a DM as well. Even if the dwarves have all been hunted and killed in the setting, if a player wants to play a dwarf, I want to work with him to make that happen (and I recognize that by saying that about dwarves up front, I am actually encouraging players to want this). Even if there are no orcs in the setting at all, I can find a way to get the mechanics of the half-orc into the setting without any real difficulty -- reskinning is trivial if the player wants to make it happen too. </p><p></p><p>I can understand not allowing non-core* options for various reasons (power-creep; the belief that it's underplaytested or disruptive; or due to accessibility -- i.e. mechanical or practical reasons), but if a player wants to commit to a certain story knowing the default assumptions of the setting, I don't see why my like/dislike of that particular race or class should even become relevant. As a DM, I've already get to control the entire universe at the table -- the player just gets one character. </p><p></p><p>I think I count myself very lucky that I've never had one of my ideas "banned" because the DM doesn't like something. Judging from this thread, I'm in a rare minority. </p><p></p><p>* I do recognize that the distinction of core/non-core may come to mean something very different in the new edition. With all the options the DMG will apparently offer, there will be some that are in, and some not. My instinct, though, is that all of the PHB will be in for games I run (incl. feats and other "optional" elements) -- even if I myself do not happen to like it. </p><p></p><p>I want my players to tell the stories that get them excited!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Kobold Stew, post: 6337812, member: 23484"] Yes, it seems I'm in this minority as well. I'm finding the whole conversation fascinating. I understand DMs wanting to ban things because they genuinely believe that it is mechanically broken. Very few of the comments in this thread of of that class, however. The majority (self-selected, admittedly) do like to ban their players playing things, because of the personal taste of the DM ("I don't like/hate x"). This is completely foreign to my experience as a player, and consequently as a DM as well. Even if the dwarves have all been hunted and killed in the setting, if a player wants to play a dwarf, I want to work with him to make that happen (and I recognize that by saying that about dwarves up front, I am actually encouraging players to want this). Even if there are no orcs in the setting at all, I can find a way to get the mechanics of the half-orc into the setting without any real difficulty -- reskinning is trivial if the player wants to make it happen too. I can understand not allowing non-core* options for various reasons (power-creep; the belief that it's underplaytested or disruptive; or due to accessibility -- i.e. mechanical or practical reasons), but if a player wants to commit to a certain story knowing the default assumptions of the setting, I don't see why my like/dislike of that particular race or class should even become relevant. As a DM, I've already get to control the entire universe at the table -- the player just gets one character. I think I count myself very lucky that I've never had one of my ideas "banned" because the DM doesn't like something. Judging from this thread, I'm in a rare minority. * I do recognize that the distinction of core/non-core may come to mean something very different in the new edition. With all the options the DMG will apparently offer, there will be some that are in, and some not. My instinct, though, is that all of the PHB will be in for games I run (incl. feats and other "optional" elements) -- even if I myself do not happen to like it. I want my players to tell the stories that get them excited! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
The Power of "NO". Banned Races and Classes?
Top