D&D General Wildly Diverse "Circus Troupe" Adventuring Parties

[W'rkncacnter]

but if no body is odd does that not mean we stop having the problem

i mean. if the players playing the odd choices want to be odd and the players that don't find the odd choices off-putting then you've really just disappointed everyone. so not necessarily.

 

[Incenjucar]

I can see there being some concerns if the setting greatly limits travel such that it's very difficult for populations to circulate. A setting where tourism and international trade would be fictions.

 

[Bae'zel]

And then there are those occasional players who come up with way too much backstory, but that is a whole other thread, probably.

I try to explain to my players that they will become unique, special or epic through their deeds, not who they are or the nature of their backstory.

Your character has a tragic past? Is the Chosen One of the Dragon Gods? That's not really as important as how that influences what you actually DO in the game. If you tie all that into your behavior, choices and and level progression, you've got something there.

But don't expect every NPC to be impressed by your level 1 "daughter of Dracula and Maleficient" until she actually accomplishes actions worthy of that title.

 

[Scribe]

I have a deep seated dislike for procedurally generated characters, so the idea that I have a 1 in a hundred chance of being a kobold better come with stats and features that are superior than every other option on that list. If I win the jackpot on a 100 roll, I better get more than small size and a strength penalty. I want wings, scales for AC and a breath weapon for that 1% chance!

I mean thats fair. I wouldnt tell someone 'no you cannot be a kobold' I just see it as a general expectation of the implied setting.

 

[eclair~]

I feel like it's a really telling thing when a "roll to determine your species/race/ancestry/lineage/whether you be green or blue" table includes "half-orc" as an option but not "orc".

Which, really, is an extension of the matter—if you want to populate your world with a variety of peoples, then why is any given people deemed less acceptable to play as than another?

 

[Remathilis]

I mean thats fair. I wouldnt tell someone 'no you cannot be a kobold' I just see it as a general expectation of the implied setting.

Which comes back to the circus trope I guess. I mean, kobold adventurers are rare (at least in my experience) but if someone really wanted to be one, I wouldn't press demographic considerations on people.

 

[Bravesteel25]

I feel like it's a really telling thing when a "roll to determine your species/race/ancestry/lineage/whether you be green or blue" table includes "half-orc" as an option but not "orc".

Which, really, is an extension of the matter—if you want to populate your world with a variety of peoples, then why is any given people deemed less acceptable to play as than another?

I'm only speaking for myself, but if I had a world like that, I would most likely not have Half-Orcs on that table, not because they aren't a viable option or that I wouldn't consider a player making one for a game, but more because they would most certainly be the exception rather than the rule within the demographics of the setting.

However, it would probably be easier to just have Orcs take the spot of Half-Orcs on such a table, but only if it fit within the world. Druidic Orcs that ride large Aurochs being something I have in my world. If someone wanted to play a Half-Orc then that would be totally okay in a context like that.

To take it one step further, a party where the majority are Orcs from the same clan would work well in my world, whereas a party where the majority are Halflings would not as they are rarely seen in the common regions of my setting.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Which comes back to the circus trope I guess. I mean, kobold adventurers are rare (at least in my experience) but if someone really wanted to be one, I wouldn't press demographic considerations on people.

Deekin sing the Doom song now?

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Yes, I have no problem with any type of character combination (for the most part) I am just frustrated by how every character needs to feel so special and different that the entire group is "othered" from the setting itself in a way.

Well, consider this:

The players are naturally othered from the setting.

The don't know anything about the world unless told. They can't see anything unless you go out of your way to describe it. They have no background in what the setting contains. Hence, being an outsider is a more natural fit for their own lived experience. It maps their personal feelings as a player more closely to their character's feelings within the world.

Further, many folks prefer that feeling of being other, apart. It inherently drives various forms of motivation and conflict. You have to figure out your place in a world you don't fully understand. You may make commitments you later regret, and might want to change. You may have insight that the insiders don't because they lack the perspective, and yet you may benefit from learning this new culture's ways. Etc. Point being, there are a lot of "stories" (in a very loose sense of the word "stories") that are driven by being a stranger in a strange land.

I've seen (from you and others) the repeated emphasis on choosing something "just to be different". I think there's...rather a lot to unpack there. More or less, that implies that you think player characters should be obliged to be not different, obliged to be as "normal" as possible, unless they have a really good reason. Where does this expectation come from? Adventurers are, after all, inherently weirdos. Old-school, you are diving into murder-holes for fun and profit, mostly profit. You are definitionally abnormal by the standards of the society in which you live.

If you see others as exclusively adopting various options to...for lack of a better term, "show off" like some kind of juvenile stunt, then of course you'll never really have much respect for the choice. If you want to feel differently about it, you have to be willing to look for reasonable reasons to do something you personally don't like and don't want to do. That will always be challenging.