D&D General Would You Play This Theme?

[R_J_K75]

I would definitely make it drow-only. Players love to push boundaries whenever someone introduces an idea for a more themed campaign, and if you allow non-drow exceptions, you'll end up with a svirfneblin servant, a drider, a changeling that's passing for a drow, and a mutated elf with reverse albinism.

Of course players are going to push boundaries. The DM can approve or veto any characters the players suggest for the campaign if it doesn't fit with what they are envisioning. I think generally Players and DM will compromise and meet somewhere in the middle for the campaign theme. If I went to a session zero and the DM already had everything planned out and was unwilling to compromise I wouldn't play.

 

[TwoSix]

Of course players are going to push boundaries. The DM can approve or veto any characters the players suggest for the campaign if it doesn't fit with what they are envisioning. I think generally Players and DM will compromise and meet somewhere in the middle for the campaign theme. If I went to a session zero and the DM already had everything planned out and was unwilling to compromise I wouldn't play.

Sure; I would just point out that players' desire to push boundaries are generally why themed games are so hard to get off the ground in the first place.

 

[R_J_K75]

Sure; I would just point out that players' desire to push boundaries are generally why themed games are so hard to get off the ground in the first place.

Thats why as a DM I generally come to a session zero with general ideas rather than a campaign theme. We decide what to play as a group most of the time for the exact reason you bring up. All it takes is one player to derail everything and then all the other players are onboard.

 

[Marandahir]

I'd need to trust the DM and party.
Evil characters are fine but require significant buy in. The theme itself doesn't feel particularly interesting to me, though. I'm not that invested in evil drow. I prefer takes on Dark Elves more akin to say, the Dunmer in Morrowind.

 

[J-H]

No, I probably wouldn't. I prefer not to explore depravity, cruelty, etc. as a goal or positive topic.

 

[Marc_C]

The way we played this one went as follows:

We were all surface elves. The city cleric had a warning by our god that the drow elves where preparing an attack on our region in a few months. We decided to get ourselves polymorphed into drow, go down in the Underdark, infiltrate the city and cut the head of the snake.

It was an extremely interesting campaign. How far down the evil path are you willing to go to infiltrate and make the mission a success? Let's just say my character never returned to the surface and remained a drow. The others returned to the surface. The mission was a success. I rolled a new character.

 

[GlassJaw]

It would absolutely depend on the DM and players involved, but also the campaign backstory.

If the drow city was destroyed by an invading and the players were survivors forced to escape and survive on their own in the Underdark. Then yes, I would consider it.

If it's just drow doing drow things, probably not.

 

[ccs]

Like pretty much everyone else here, my answer is "Yes, depending upon the group/DM."

 

[Oofta]

I've never been a fan of anti-heroes or evil campaigns, so no. I get that my PC wouldn't have to be evil but I'd have to (presumably) support people that were.

Anything that went further than Invader Zim evil (i.e. cartoon evil, not a serious campaign) is a pass. I'm sure it would work for a lot of people, just not me.

 

[Istbor]

So long as we are talking about the party having strong ties and reasons they wouldn't be bask-stabbing each other, I would be down.