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

[Bravesteel25]

The players are naturally othered from the setting.

Yes, to a degree I agree with what you are saying. However, I don't feel like the characters should be so "othered" that they feel completely disconnected from the setting in play. That seems to occur quite a bit, or at least I have a perception that it does, which leads the DM to shoehorn a justification for a pacifist Pixy Paladin (say that three times fast ) being in the world in the first place because that's what Bob brought to the table from his roster of characters he's got waiting to see play.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Yes, to a degree I agree with what you are saying. However, I don't feel like the characters should be so "othered" that they feel completely disconnected from the setting in play. That seems to occur quite a bit, or at least I have a perception that it does, which leads the DM to shoehorn a justification for a pacifist Pixy Paladin (say that three times fast ) being in the world in the first place because that's what Bob brought to the table from his roster of characters he's got waiting to see play.

Perhaps. But this brings up another aspect.

You mention the players having a stable of characters, or at least character concepts. Something I have noticed is...a lot, and I mean a LOT, of GMs don't really want their players being very creative or offbeat with their characters. They want extremely "normal" people. Preferably human or (with major dispensation) the Tolkien options. Preferably "core four" classes or, with slight reluctance, the nearby classes (e.g. Druid, Ranger, Paladin, Barbarian, Bard), and preferably not the "weird" ones (Artificer, Monk, and Warlock in particular). These GMs may even ban any other races or options. Other elements (e.g. personality) allow quite a bit of freedom, but in terms of what the character is and what they do, a lot of GMs are pretty sharply limiting what players can choose and don't have much (if any) patience for players who have even somewhat different interests/preferences.

So, if these are players whom you know have played in many other games, what would this effect have on their preferences? They've been asked to play the same mostly-human characters over and over for years. From your perspective, it might look like they're trying to be disruptive. From theirs, they're finally getting allowed to pull out one of the concepts they've had to hold in the bank for years because they so rarely get the chance to.

Obviously this won't be true of every group or every player. But it's just another example of why this kind of behavior might happen. When so, so, so many GMs out there are ultra-traditionalist, the player might feel a strong motivation to break the mold. Conversely, the GM might say, "why is it MY game has to be the game where folks do that?" And there is no good answer. Because it isn't your fault that you have a "please fit in seamlessly with the world around you" preference, but when almost every GM has that preference, it's going to chafe for a player base with more diverse tastes.

 

[The Firebird]

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.

This is precisely why it's important for players to choose a character that fits into the world, imo. They are already removed from it, and that means dramatic beats don't land and they naturally think "why should I care about these people again?" The reason is because it's the game the GM decided to run today.

If you give them stakes and a personal connection to the community then the game feels more grounded and authentic.

That doesn't mean you can't have circus parties. A threat that has an impact on many distinct species was given, and that's comparable to Lord of the Rings.

But if everyone is an outsider from a strange land with no personal stake, then it amplifies the players separation from the world, and the resulting experience feels more like a MMO.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

This is precisely why it's important for players to choose a character that fits into the world, imo. They are already removed from it, and that means dramatic beats don't land and they naturally think "why should I care about these people again?" The reason is because it's the game the GM decided to run today.

If you give them stakes and a personal connection to the community then the game feels more grounded and authentic.

That doesn't mean you can't have circus parties. A threat that has an impact on many distinct species was given, and that's comparable to Lord of the Rings.

But if everyone is an outsider from a strange land with no personal stake, then it amplifies the players separation from the world, and the resulting experience feels more like a MMO.

Whereas I think it makes no impact one way or the other.

Why does that make it feel like an MMO? Almost all MMOs actively work to make you feel part of the world nearly instantly. That's like a core storytelling step for them. Intro quests which get your feet firmly planted.

People throw around this "MMO" claim and I so often wonder whether they've even played an MMO, let alone whether they know anything about how they're built and designed.

Who cares whether the whole party is "othered" or not? You portray this as somehow a bad thing, where players are now incapable of...something unsaid, not sure what. Why? It's just a different kind of story. Conan the Barbarian is a stranger in a strange land and his companions almost exclusively also are from far away or don't speak the language etc. Why is that totally fine, but doing it as a D&D party is somehow a problem?

If you want players to have a personal stake, it's on you to build one. I have to as GM. Was recently reminded of that, in fact. I don't see why the players should be obliged to hand their GM four copies of Generic Everyman Jane Smith, Doer of Mundane Job at the Township of Placeville just so they start off caring slightly more about that GM's prewritten plot.

 

[Clint_L]

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.

I agree: isn't the whole point of the adventuring party that they are all exceptional? Drizz't was the only good Drow, etc.

 

[The Firebird]

People throw around this "MMO" claim and I so often wonder whether they've even played an MMO, let alone whether they know anything about how they're built and designed.

I played DDO, Guild Wars, and Maplestory. Ime in these you don't feel like a part of the world--you can't really have an effect on it, any characters you have relationships with have the same dialogue and the same response to anyone in the world--it is like a theme park that you and your friends move through without changing anything. That's not necessarily a bad thing but I want something different in tabletop.

Who cares whether the whole party is "othered" or not? You portray this as somehow a bad thing, where players are now incapable of...something unsaid, not sure what. Why? It's just a different kind of story. Conan the Barbarian is a stranger in a strange land and his companions almost exclusively also are from far away or don't speak the language etc. Why is that totally fine, but doing it as a D&D party is somehow a problem?

In the movie, Conan is connected to the primary villain who is now active in the lands they're in. In the stories, Conan is often given a personal tie--he is king, or in the governor's service. Or we have a side character who does have a close relationship to the area.

When he is an outsider (Queen of the Black Coast or Red Nails) the story leans into the idea of travel and of seeing an unfamiliar society. If you're running a pirate campaign then the circus idea is a good one. It makes sense that the PCs are a diverse lot because they occupy a diverse part of society.

It's when they're both way more unique than the society they live in and don't have a stake in that society that it becomes a problem.

 

[Scribe]

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".

That half-orc is playable, while orc is not? I mean whats it telling?