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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Loonook" data-source="post: 4777487" data-attributes="member: 1861">Not every game is a vast collaborative exercise in creativity... hell, most aren't.  Games can be highly creative (players can build organizations, raise kingdoms, topple tyrants, create towns out of their minds)... but everyone operates within the confines established by the initial theme.  We operate within plenty of issues when we initially start any game; we decide the rules set, the basic setting (or to play in a pre-written CS), any house rulings which will pop up.  And if you are a player, it is within your scope to choose not to play in a game which doesn't fit your specific ideas of what it should be.  However, no player has the right to have the game completely bent to their will over the will of all of the players and/or the DM.  The DM is the storyteller, R&D, economist, referee, and a hundred other jobs... and for doing all of that work, the DM gets to have more say than any single player. If you want to play a game where everything is topsy turvy its your go... and no one can hold you to it.  It's entirely within the right of any player to leave the game... but don't become too dramatic and believe that accommodation is a necessity.  Accommodation in gaming only works during that period where the initial frameworks are being set... and then at specific points when the group can get together and discuss things.  Otherwise a nice, long, dramatic storyline could be uprooted every time a new sourcebook comes out... and that would be a very sad thing.The beauty of any roleplaying system, and especially games in the vein of d20 or WoD is that they can have a thousand options... or a handful.  We're supplied a number of tools which are only limited by imagination... but in making such a large amount of tools available there should be established local restraint.  I've seen too many games fall apart because of complaints about sourcebook X, or race Y, and it can be a sad thing.If you like the stats of the thing, you could play any creature with similar.  Dragonborn, Tieflings... they don't need to LOOK like lizards with attitude, or cheap demon doll knockoffs.  On the other hand, you could have a scaly man who walks about with the same stats as any other race.  Transformations, demonic bargains, horrible eldritch forces... all sorts of tropes could make for a more interesting character with similar stats. Sell your soul?  You could be a tiefling... stats and all.  Born under the auspice of the Dragon Star?  Look... he seems to be a scaly.  Doesn't force a DM to create an entire civilization around the new sourcebook... and lets you have your freedom in a way that doesn't destroy narrative focus by causing a divergence into a path which may prove antithetical to the campaign.  Character growth, story growth, and player growth should not be set akilter to worldbuilding... but they shouldn't shoehorn a world on the whim of a single player.Slainte,-Loonook.PS: On the note of the original thread... I always liked the concept of tieflings, but hate the idea that every tiefling has to be some hot-eyed horned mess.  Same goes for Dragonborn, Warforged, etc.  It's about what you want to play, or run... not about what gets thrown in your lap by the newest sourcebook.</blockquote>

Verification