D&D 5E When lore and PC options collide…

[Micah Sweet]

Yes but: as a player, if I don't agree with the balance concern I'd be a lot less enthusiastic about the game. No class in 5e is overpowered, and I'm not worried about any official subclass offhand. If we're playing 3.5 there's several options that I would agree are too powerful - or so underpowered that you'd rather the player refluff a better class to make the concept work (ie don't play a samurai - play a warblade with pseudo-Japanese fluff). If I don't know the game I'd probably roll with whatever the dm thinks.

It all comes back to a more basic premise in my mind: I don't judge restrictions in themselves; I judge the reasoning behid the restriction.

For example, if your setting just does not have anything even kind of like steampunk in it, you might remove artificers as a class. If that's because you want a really low magic setting that's one thing - but if it's just a low-tech setting I might really want to make a swordmage using the battlesmith mechanics and the rune knight fluff, which could work with nary a cog at all. I'd expect a reasonable hearing-out of the idea, at least.

Honestly the only way you can dm "wrong" is to not let the players pitch stuff at all. What you exclude is just playstyle.

I'm always willing to hear out players. But I also reserve the right to make the call.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

Normally I defer to PC options. My homebrew isn't so inflexible that it will be ruined by someone saying "hey, can I play a Shifter?" if I haven't included shifters in my worldbuilding. Same goes for published settings.

Now, if it's based on an established literary property or setting, I might be less charitable. If someone wants to play a Tiefling in Adventures in Middle-Earth, that might be a different story. I suppose the difference is that D&D settings are designed to facilitate playing D&D, whereas if I were to be running a game set in Middle-Earth or The Black Company, the whole point is to evoke a specific literary world.

Now, I'm definitely more likely to say no to someone trying to bring lore from one world to a next. If someone says "can I play a House Cannith noble in Faerun?" or "Can my cleric worship The Traveller in Krynn?," that to me feels more world-breaking than any mechanical thing.

 

[jmartkdr2]

And another thing:

In my experience, if this is really a problem, the root cause is "the players haven't bought into the campaign's premise."

If you try to force people to play Dark Sun who don't want to play Dark Sun, you'll get a lot of gnomes and wizards and (insert background that doesn't work in Athas) - if the players were sold on the idea, they wouldn't want to make a character who doesn't fit. They'd want to make a mul gladiator.

 

[Xamnam]

Normally I defer to PC options. My homebrew isn't so inflexible that it will be ruined by someone saying "hey, can I play a Shifter?" if I haven't included shifters in my worldbuilding. Same goes for published settings.

Now, if it's based on an established literary property or setting, I might be less charitable.

Yeah, my world is super malleable, and if you're doing me the kindness of playing there, the least I can do is listen to what you want earnestly.

But if we've already decided to use a historically established setting, well, we chose it for a reason, and generally my goal is to hew as close as enjoyable possible, no matter which side of the table I'm on.

The only sort of restrictions that I really chafe at the idea of are stuff like: no magic classes at all while still using D&D 5e.

 

[Blue]

This is a settled question.

Kitchen Sink settings like the Forgotten Realms have been reprinted and sold through multiple editions. There are enough buyers, they are a commercial success. This is definitely wanted by a large chunk of D&D gamers.

Restricted settings like Dark Sun have been reprinted and sold through multiple editions. There are enough buyers, they are a commercial success. This is definitely wanted by a large chunk of D&D gamers.

There is no debate, we know the answer for this.

If you read the poll as "which do you personally prefer", it can be a valid poll. But as a fact we know that both have widespread appeal - it's why there are different styles of tomato sauce.

 

[Oofta]

And my theory is that this is judgmental hypertraditionalism which holds the hobby back from achieving its highest heights and best implementation. Derogatory dismissal does the hobby a disservice, and "ah, you don't actually want to play D&D, the things you like don't actually belong here" is absolutely derogatory dismissal.

When it comes to lore, how is D&D being held back? We have campaigns that span ancient Greece to noir Eberron to space fantasy Spelljammer to gothic horror Ravenloft. We have dozens of races and some of them aren't even elves. Any individual campaign may want to limit things for thematic reasons, but calling that hypertraditionalism feels like just as derogatory, just as much a dismissal of people's preferences as anything.

 

[Maxperson]

it depends... if the lore is actually there for a reason, and makes a difference I defer to the lore, but often I find the lore is really just 'what we wanted when we wrote it' and I don't find that important at all...

orcs in DL vs orcs in Dark Sun... put a tribe of Orcs in Krynn no one will notice, put one in Athas and that is game changing.

On Athas I could stick a small tribe or orcs in the forest behind the halflings and it would be just a noticeable or not as on Krynn. The sorcerer kings could have missed a few. There is no difference. Both are a matter of sticking to the lore of the world or not.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Normally I defer to PC options. My homebrew isn't so inflexible that it will be ruined by someone saying "hey, can I play a Shifter?" if I haven't included shifters in my worldbuilding. Same goes for published settings.

I will add that I had a player ask if he could use the warforged stats in a game that most likely shouldn't have had warforged in it... BUT his concept was "I'm not part of a race, I am a single golem made to be like a shield guardian... but I turned on the evil wizard killed him and found my own way in the world"

it worked so well that is the most memorable character from that 3.5 game.

 

[DND_Reborn]

We have campaigns that span ancient Greece to noir Eberron to space fantasy Spelljammer to gothic horror Ravenloft. We have dozens of races and some of them aren't even elves.

And more importantly, IMO, is we've had a lot of these things for a LONG TIME now... most of it isn't new to 5E, or ever WotC really.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

On Athas I could stick a small tribe or orcs in the forest behind the halflings and it would be just a noticeable or not as on Krynn. The sorcerer kings could have missed a few. There is no difference. Both are a matter of sticking to the lore of the world or not.

no one is sticking to the lore "They were genocide along with other races" the other is "cause we said so"