Every time I try to look into D&D 5e I realize tieflings

>>49467372
>Is this how 2nd ed players felt about half-orcs being added as a core race?

A lot of 'em, yeah.

Half-orcs didn't feel special snowflake. They felt more like that guy who plays a retard race so that his fighter has better fighter stats. Dumb, but not the same as Dragonborn.

File: Beautiful_Orc_Manboy_by_DavidRapozaArt.jpg (254KB, 668x890px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 668x890px

>>49467436
Half-Orcs feel like they make sense to me. though I don't know if they're so common they should be a core race any more than half-drow.

Tieflings make sense, but not as a fucking core race.

>>49467372
>I realize tieflings and dragonborn are core races now and I start to lose interest.
That's sad. I started to lose interest when I realized the books were $50 each and were still broken as fuck

>>49467481
If my Chinese comics taught me anything, there should be actually be large number of half-orc/half-elves

File: bleach-generic-clorox[1].jpg (985KB, 3000x2005px) Image search: [Google]

985KB, 3000x2005px

>>49467542
Books? Nigga I'm smart enough to download the pdfs first. If I can't even make a character without contemplating drinking the stuff under the sink I'm not buying the actual books.

>>49467372
One of my best friends rolled a dragon born. He made a table and randomly rolled the dice for each and every choice about his character. Folk hero blue dragonborn life domain cleric. His back story has him formerly trained by humans and he plays pretty much like a normal PC race.

As compared to the usual special snowflake wacky race player character, I'm fine with it. Although I wouldn't mind at all if the only core races were elf, dwarf, and human desu.

File: phbrac.jpg (332KB, 1140x1445px) Image search: [Google]

332KB, 1140x1445px

>>49467426
but half-orcs were a core race in 1st edition

>>49467372
Half orcs were core in 1e AD&D. I think they were excised in 2e because of the implication that they were all rape babies.

File: hkfldshfh.jpg (25KB, 500x469px)

25KB, 500x469px

>>49467605
That is one autistic looking half-orc.

Half-Orcs were a half assed concession because Gygax didn't want Orc adventures. Despite letting a guy play a full on vampire at one point.

Anyway, I honestly prefer genuinely weird and unique shit as playable races vs Human+a bunch of boring offshoots.
>>49467481
My question is, why SHOULDN'T tieflings be a core race? They're individuals with demonic heritage. They can crop up wherever other beings that reproduce do.

What make something "worthy" of being a "core", and what disqualifies them from being a core race.

Is it just showing up in Lord of the Rings?

>>49467622
I would imagine a lot of them ARE rape babies depending on the setting.

Though there are some barbarian tribes that interbreed with nearby orc tribes and so on and so forth.

Still if you're in the mainland there was probably a whole lotta rapin goin on.

>>49467642
I would say, personally, that its not worthy of being a core race if it isn't common.

CORE implies that theres a degree of normality to that race. If a DM wants to allow players to play a god damn mind flayer they can. But Mind flayers aren't common enough that most normal swineherds were going to see one in their lifetime.

>>49467642
I think its being common in the workd and a degree of freedom in alignment.

There can't be that much demon on mortal sex for them to be a double digit minority in a normal city.

>>49467692
>There can't be that much demon on mortal sex for them to be a double digit minority in a normal city.
There doen't need to be. You just need ONE ancestor with a demonic connection(not even sexual, the descendants of a crusading paladin who fought the Abyss could sire tieflings, shit's like magical Agent Orange).

This is before 4e turned them into an entire nation of guys who danced with the devil. I'm not fresh on what 5e tieflings are.
>>49467674
>CORE implies that theres a degree of normality to that race
I always thought it had to do with the idea of them being in a CORE book. Which is where the basic rules for things are.

>>49467642
>I honestly prefer genuinely weird and unique shit as playable races vs Human+a bunch of boring offshoots.

Special snowflakes are boring.

>>49467790

This. If the only way you can make a character interesting is by doings something superficial like slapping a pair of horns on him then you're doing it wrong.

>>49467790
If you aren't going to play a human, why not go whole hog?

I prefer human only fantasy settings or something "exotic".

And what makes a tiefling or dragonborn any more special snowflakey than an elf or gnome aside from you being conditioned into thinking the later two are "normal"?

Are you a special snowflake because your not Chinese, or whatever the most numerous race is in your area?

>>49467838
>This. If the only way you can make a character interesting is by doings something superficial like slapping a pair of horns on him then you're doing it wrong
Why are we assuming that this is the only characterization your going to get.

Almost all of the other "core" races have just as much snowflake potential. I don't see how saying "yeah your guy can have horns now and probably got bullied" is any worse than saying "yeah your guy is part of a magically gifted, nigh immortal and eternally young, race of forest dwellers."

>>49467838
I've played all the races on the core rulebook with all the core classes by 3.5

My favorite character is still my liche I got to use only one session.

Maybe all the other players remember more fondly my human fighter who wanted to be a paladin or my elf ranger that could clip a butterfly's wings with an arrow. But I'll be damned if my liche wasn't such a fun idea to play.

Making something interesting doesn't equal to fun to play.

>>49467838
>If the only way you can make a character interesting is by doings something superficial like slapping a pair of horns on him then you're doing it wrong
That more or less sums it up.

That lack of creativity is also why you some have people claiming that having characters do things like ride horses, wear armor, or be humans makes them 'all the same'. To some people, those cosmetic differences are all they think about.

>>49467865
One of my favorite fantasy settings was the original Guild Wars because humans were the only playable race. It was great.

Elves are very close, I'll accept them. Shortstacks are annoying. Half-orcs are a race for power gamers.

>>49467372
I've probably been playing longer than you and I think you're a faggot. D&D does not have to conform to you little faggot idea of what D&D should be. You are the kind of gamer that would be the death of games if he had a following. And I don't even like 5e, mind you.

File: Grippli[1].jpg (282KB, 498x1000px) Image search: [Google]

282KB, 498x1000px

>>49467941
So much this. The retarded shit I've had my players bring to the table sometimes.

I had one player bring a grippli paladin to the table who's mount was a fucking hippo. I wish I were joking.

Like how the fuck are you supposed to have a frogman go into a town on the back of a hippo without causing a stir? I don't want every single session to devolve into 'What are ye wee frog man?"

But seriously... are people supposed to just be ok with it?

>>49468003
Sorry there are people that like things that aren't retarded.

>>49468000
What edition are you talking about Humans have been the best race in D&D for a while.

Half-Orcs range from mediocre to good. Hardly power gamey. Elves and Half-Elves range from good to power gamey.

Aasimer are cheese 99.9% of the the time.

>>49467642
>Is it just showing up in Lord of the Rings?
Pretty much, yeah. You can't underestimate how autistic people are about Lord of the Rings.

>>49468066
Yeah, I guess they are, aren't they. I played more pen and paper D&D during the 3e era where humans were very good. But these days I mostly just replay Baldur's Gate, where the half-orc is a strictly better fighter.

>>49468006
>But seriously... are people supposed to just be ok with it?
If you let them play the race have it be a somewhat common occurrence. And just because something is "new" doesn't make it a show stopper. Word spreads and people live for a long time.

"Oh you're one of the Grippli fellas. Just had a caravan of you're kin pass through a month ago. Caught one of the little bastards staring saucy at my daughter."

It's jarring because you wrote your setting to be bland milqtoast bullshit. He came from somewhere? Think about how that somewhere has interacted with the world and vice versa.
>>49467941
Aren't you part of the problem by assuming all the player wants is the cosmetic differences.

Shit all of the core races are basically humans with odd cosmetic differences?.

>>49468102
And, elves are strictly better wizards and dwarves are strictly better clerics. It's like some races were made to fit into certain roles.

When the role is melee combat everyone loses there shit and screams power gamer for some reason.

File: Muppets_Tolkein_Andy_Hunter[1].jpg (479KB, 1200x1052px) Image search: [Google]

479KB, 1200x1052px

>>49468138
I agree. Lord of the Rings would have been so much better if Frodo's gardener had been kermit the frog.

>>49467790
Then why are you playing a wandering knight as opposed to a farmer?

>>49468060
The problem is never in liking things. The problem is disliking things for the only reason that they are different from the first thing you liked.
This is supposed to be a creative hobby. If your first reaction to a bit of lore is 'that's retarded because of reasons' you are probably not fit for the hobby.

>>49468102
>where the half-orc is a strictly better fighter.
And fighters are strictly inferior to basically everything.

>>49468185
On the other hand, I'm expecting creativity from a 3.5 kid. A foolish proposition, I realize.

>>49468060
No one who claims to like D&D, any edition, can say they like things that aren't retarded. Being a complete clusterfuck of weird shit is why that game is fun.

>>49468003
>scalie detected

>>49467790
people who costantly hate on everything and won't let people have fucking fun are broing.
And this is said nby someone who always picked the boring Human choice.

Every core race other than human has the potential to be a crappy special snowflake if the character doesnt go any further than "I'm an X".

Elves, Dwarves, Halflings and Gnomes can be just as 'unique outsider with special powers' as Dragonborn.

Half-Orcs, Half-Elves and Drow can be just as 'tragic backstory misunderstood outsider' as Tiefling.

The only core race I have an issue with is the Dragonborn, and that's because they were literally shoved into the Forgotten Realms setting in 4e and don't feel like they belong because of it. But that doesn't change that a decent player will make a decent character with one.

>>49467768

5e did a lot of "let's just pretend that never happened" in regards to 4e lore. Tieflings are back to being 'You had a great great great grandfather who had some kind of contact with a fiend that you never knew about? Surprise mutant baby!'.

>>49468239
>>49468239
I doubt it. I'd guess
>>49468237

Dragonborn are basically lizardmen, and lizardmen are really gay.

>>49468299
>lizardmen are gay
You're gay.

i just want halflings/gnomes to leave

they're literally meme races that don't even have especially distinct differences from eachother, let alone other humanoid races.

I'm not asking for full on furries as core, but some goblins or some of the less reclusive fey creatures would work way better

>>49468340
>i just want halflings/gnomes to leave
Seriously this? Why not just make the comfy/hippy dwarves,

Why are elves the only fantasy race to get a shit ton of variations?
>wild elf
>high elf
>normal elf
>drow
>sea elf

>>49468383
yeah fuck
>Sun elf
>Moon elf
>Dusk elf
>Desert elf
>Snow elf

>>49468138
>Aren't you part of the problem by assuming all the player wants is the cosmetic differences.
I've spent years playing with these people and looking for explanations. That's the one that makes the most sense to me.

People who claim that rarely seem to be looking for roleplay possibilities that don't happen with humans (which are pretty few and far between considering the breadth of human interaction). They tend to pounce on GMs who make NPCs have any difference in reaction aside from praise and unconcealed wonder, and everyone quickly gets tired of having every NPC stand in total awe.

And then you get people who think that having PCs use similar equipment (armor, mounts, helmets, weapon choices) deprives them of originality and makes uniqueness impossible, even though that is quite obviously not the case to anyone who has ever watched a war movie or even a historical fiction show. The only explanation I have found is that these people, at least at the time they make such complaints, are simply not considering the things typically associated with character depth like strengths, weaknesses, conflicts, quirks, and motivations.

>>49468172
> Lord of the Rings would have been so much better if Frodo's gardener had been kermit the frog.
Sesame Street LotR reboot when?

Personally I prefer elves to be NPC's or even outright semi mythical in settings.

Otherwise they get watered down. And I like having 'hill dwarves' or whatever instead of gnomes.

>>49468712
>Personally I prefer elves to be NPC's or even outright semi mythical in settings.
>Otherwise they get watered down.

This. I like my elves to be one step away from fairy monsters, not "humans with pointy ears who are sometimes dicks to people".

why is it so hard to think of a dwarf concept that isn't a hunter, a miner/craftsman, a cleric/paladin, and/or a drunk?

What else do they do?

I don't know, but I'm going to have to call everyone here into question.

I can understand complaints if more of you mentioned how a PC and the player were being jerks,

but a lot of you are just complaining that the option is there. Do any of you actually game?

>>mystara aka becmi dnd setting had fucking radiation magic, time travel and ray guns as part of the setting
>op is a dnd 3e baby who thinks dnd is for serious business only

Gonzo motherfucker ever heard of it?

>>49468778
It's not the fact that there's an option, it's that core races are held up as the most 'standard' races, which in turn lends perceived legitimacy to them, and players and GMs alike assume those races are common.

So you end up with streets and adventuring parties full of dragon men, elves from the underdark, and infernally-warped humanoids, as if any of those things aren't supposed to be more on the uncommon side.

>>49468712
>Otherwise they get watered down.
Guess LotR was already watering down elves huh

>>49468869
The book says they are uncommon.

At the same time, don't you set your games in larger, metropolitan cities? It's a better justification for why such weird PCs get together.

>>49468869
It's almost like the game is highly customization and meant for GMs to assume what is and isn't common in their world.

File: halforc.jpg (327KB, 630x900px)

327KB, 630x900px

>>49467642

I find the idea of a "core" race should be one that other core races interact with. Tieflings, Dragonborn, hell, even Half-Orcs are rare enough that I don't think they should be a core background race.

The only reason I'd even consider giving Half-Elves a pass is because Humans and Elves get along well enough in most settings that the idea of them producing offspring, while not common, wouldn't be all THAT rare compared to Half-Orcs, which are basically either rape-offspring or the byproduct of the strangest Romeo and Juliet love story ever told.

I'm fine with the races in settings where it makes sense. Tieflings in a setting where demonic interaction is flat-out common would make sense. Dragonborne make sense in a world where Dragons involve themselves enough in actual wars that making a slave-race of cannonfodder (relative to actual dragons) would make sense.

However, you have to tweak the setting for that. For Half-Orcs to exist as a common enough race to be a background, Orcs must have splintered into two groups, the Fuck Humans group and the "Fuck" Humans group which gets along great with the tiny, pale or dark bastards and is a regular ally.

You can't spawn an entire race with hatefucking.

>>49468994
They aren't an entire race, there the result of a union. That's like saying you shouldn't be able to play a mulatto or something in a game taking place on earth.


You're playing a game full of uncommon scenarios. D&D is about adventure and dungeon crawling not farming and training to be a squire just to fall off your horse and die of a concussion.

>>49469032

>if it's not core I can't play it ever

Blame your DM.

>>49468299
Lizardmen are fucking awesome. I hate dragonborn mainly because I like lizardmen. Dragonborn are just "I'm a lizardmen except better in every, and I have a breath attack, and I'm a PC race because I have dragon on my name instead of lizard".

>>49468383
>>49468470

Try playing a game with less race choices.

Hell, 5e released a free Onnestrad planescape splat that gives human the options to play like an elf.

>>49467372
>half orcs introduced in 2nd Ed.

Fucking pleb

You guys do know there's a line between common and unicorn right?

Just because you don't see something everyday or every year doesn't mean it's existence is an oddity.

>>49468299

>lizardmen are really gay

All dwarf players are literal homos

>>49468772
I always write them I'm settings as bankers and prize animal breeders. They make the finest animals through generation after generation of stubbornly pursuing a specific end goal with that animal.

Banking is just logical to me. They already did up the precious metals and gems. They also have extensive record keeping for the family histories. Why wouldn't they start minting currency and keeping track of debts?

>>49468981
>>49469082
Except nobody ever fucking does. GMs always just go 'yeah core races' since it's easiest. If they have more experience, then it's core + some other supplement, but I've been in maybe one game ever where any of the core races were not all present or even considered less common in the setting, even to the point where it clashed with established setting lore

File: halforc2.jpg (43KB, 500x647px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 500x647px

>>49469032
I let players play unusual races all the time, I just require them to justify it with a decent backstory if it clashes with the campaign setting.

If they want to be a Half-Orc in a setting where Orcs and Humans are at war, I want a better fucking explanation for it than "Half-Orcs are cool," and even if I allow it I'm going to tell them that straight-up their decision to play a character of that race WILL bite them in the ass at times.

Part of being a good DM, even in D&D, is about worldbuilding. If they're playing in a world where Orcs hate Humans and Humans hate Orcs, the Half-Orc is going to be a man or woman who can't really find much peace on either side.

If the fluff makes it a core part of the setting, cool. If it doesn't explain it and offers it up as an option and it doesn't really make much sense within the context of the setting, damn right I'll exercise my right to throw a ban on the race unless the player's really willing to fight for it.

>>49467605
>>49467622
This. If a 2bie gets upset over half-orcs ruining the integrity of his game, it's not because he's old school, it's because he's middle school.

>>49467372
I've been playing since the early 80s and I don't have an issue with tieflings. I really fucking hate dragonborn though.

>>49468299
Lizardmen kick ass. Dragonborn are fucking gay (and not in an awesome, Freddie Mercury way).

>>49467605
>spot the retard

>>49468340
I've always enjoyed allowing goblins, hobgoblins, and orcs as a playable race in my games and common sights in human cities. I used half-orc stats for orcs, though, because fuck that LA +1 shit.

>>49468340
>>49468383
>>49468470
>samefagging this hard
>hating on hobbits
>judging the races solely on height
Halflings (totally not hobbits guys) are ideally homebodies who just happen to sneak well. They're also older than you, dipshit. Their racial profile was well-defined in the same book that Goblin was a name for an Orc. Have some respect for good writing.

Gnomes on the other hand should be the adventurous, inventive race that piss off the halflings to no end. That said, removing them is totally valid.

Maybe read fantasy books that aren't 3.PF. For all the cool stuff in that style, they really tanked on the short races in my opinion.

>>49468152
Melee is MAD so a races that are specifically "built" for that tend to have multiple ability score bonuses which may come off as overpowered compared to other races. Casters are usually SAD, so it doesn't seem unreasonable to have a race with +2 int or wis. It's also not impossible at all to build a functioning caster without a bonus to their main ability score or even with a penalty.
Another reason for people to dislike races made for melee is the commonly held belief that humans should be the best race or at least nearly the best for any role, so introducing a race obviously superior to them in something is seen as going against something so fundamental that it's just plain heresy.

>>49467372
So sick of the Drizzt complaints. He was actually a decent character, and he kinda acts how elves are classically portrayed, some of his books actually had him coming to terms with being an elf in a human dominated world.

Stop bitching about core races, book even says to take them out if you don't want them. Why is it that older edition player whine so much?

>>49467542
>Broken as fuck
Wat?
The games probably the most balanced edition, outside of 4e and it didn't even have to turn into a wargame to do it.

>>49470188
Drizzt was basically an elf nigger trying to be white. He was the michael jackson of elves.

He's the epitomy of a special snowflake. "I'm just like normal elves, I'm good but everyone around me is evil cuz they're black."

>>49467542
They even smell bad.

>>49468383
Dude. Theres shield dwarves, gold dwarves, duergar. Rock gnomes, deep gnomes, ghostwise halflings, orogs, genasi. All kinds of non elf subraces.

Shit you can even consider aasimar and tieflings human subraces.

>>49467372

I agree with some parts but it's really easy to work around. Why are you crying.

>>49467372
What tieflings and dragonborn are cool.

>>49467372
I think a better way to say it would be that not everything is good for every setting. Tieflings and dragonborn probably aren't good for a basic kind of setting.

Some people like kitchen sink fantasy settings, some people like them more rooted and focused. We're all sitting around pretending to be dwarves and shit. No reason to argue about it.

after playing dragonborn for nearly a year I gave up and forcibly killed my character off and apologized to my party, explaining that I would never want to play that character again and dragonborn should be added to the ban list along with tieflings and gnomes

the shame will haunt me forever

>>49467372
>Every time I try to look into D&D 5e I realize tieflings and dragonborn are core races now and I start to lose interest.
They were Core last edition too.

>>49471297
We don't mention 4e around these parts.

>>49468994
Do you really think there's no barbarian/evil humans in most settings?

>>49470295
You spoony bard

>>49471297
But they had a role in the history.

Dragonborn and Tieflings weren't uncommon in POLand and they had justifiable reasons for existing.

Unlike Forgotten Realms, which should of stayed dead with TSR.

>>49472597

Anything with that many fans is never gonna stay dead as long as it's basically a license to print money...pun not intended.

It never should have been the base setting for 5e though, that's just a clusterfuck.

>>49468470

Sun elves and moon elves are just FR names for high elves and grey elves (I forget which is which). Desert elf and snow elf were introduced in books that generally provided new subraces for most of the core races, subraces which were intended to be used in campaigns that featured a certain environment heavily and which in practice were usually only used if they were good for a powergamer build. I've never even heard of a dusk elf.

Elves have no less than six distinct subraces, which is three times what the average race gets, and that is ridiculous, but don't blow the issue out of proportion.

>>49467372
I was under the impression Tieflings, gnomes, dark elves, half elves, and half orcs were all "talk to your DM about the setting and tone" options. Theyre statted, but all but the dark elf are after a passage about the races being non-present in all settings and being rare in the ones that they are in.

>>49468869

The 5e book splits the core races into common and uncommon. Anyone who thinks dragonborn, gnomes, tieflings, half-elves, or half-orcs are common hasn't actually read the PHB.

>>49469059

You're undercutting your own argument. If we're pushing the handling of races wholly onto the GM and don't care what kind of preconceptions they get about a race from it being core or not, then it doesn't make any difference at all where exactly a race appears, except in that being in the core release makes it easier to reference and also means that people can play that race out the gate without having to homebrew anything - which brings us to the reason that actual sane people make races core, which has nothing to do with population density and everything to do with popularity amongst players. If a race is popular, lots of GMs will need to homebrew it, so it is a convenience to stat it up in advance for the same reason it's a convenience to have stats for any race at all.

>>49467372
I pretty much welcome all races into my fantasy games, unless I have a specific story-related reason not to ("Sorry, you can't play a dwarf, because this is a story about finding out why they vanished"). My way of handling players who bring in "weird" races is to have most NPCs simply not react. Everything is common-place. But then, I kind of enjoy taking the wind out of the special snowflakes' sails.

>>49468881

When the bulk of what came before was "hang on to your kidneys and children", then yes, absolutely.

File: drow-rogue-2.jpg (175KB, 748x1067px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 748x1067px

>>49472981
I suppose that would cut down on the 'I'm special because I'm an evil elf but I'm actually good' types.

definitive List of Acceptable Player Races:

-Human

>>49468712
>>49473071

You... I like you.

I legitimately do not understand the grievances with dragonborn. They are just dragony people. Why the fuck do people get their panties twisted over them? The only reason they're not lizardfolk is because lizardfolk remain the prehistoric brute race from legacy D&D. So they're elegant lizardfolk.

>>49473208

Also: You know, it's Dungeons and DRAGONS. Dragons kinda tend to be a thing.

>>49473208

The fantastical elements of a setting should exist along it's liminal zones, so that the setting seems relatable to players existing in the real-world, and imparts a sense of verisimilitude and "heading into the unknown," but also so that the actual fantastical elements are truly interesting. When you have MAGIC EVERYWHERE, it becomes stupid and meaningless.

If you like Dragonborn, you are an idiot.

>>49468006
>But seriously... are people supposed to just be ok with it?

...Yes?

It's fantasy, there's a whole village of frog people like a 20 minute walk from here.

If playing a frog makes the player happy, it's your job as a DM to justify it.

>>49473248

But Elves, fey walking among mortals, are fun?

>>49468748
Shakespeare elves are disgusting.

File: 8650_k-on.jpg (1MB, 4242x2998px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4242x2998px

>>49468219

I mean, for fuck's sake, my next session I'm running in my DnD-in-high-school campaign is a tactical combat encounter where the party plays dodgeball against the half-orc football team.

That's *completely retarded*. And that's why it's fun. The dwarf barbarian wants to join a music club, and I'm going to go full fucking K-ON! with murderhobos with it and we're going to have a good time.

And if you think that's retarded, then you're right, but that's why tabletop gaming is fun.

File: jack-daniels-tennessee-whiskey.jpg (27KB, 413x1000px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 413x1000px

>>49473258
Thats retarded. The GM isn't just there to be the player's bitch for whatever autistic lol-so-random fantasies the players want to go on.

Its why seasoned GM's cringe when the entire party is chaotic neutral because they know the party is just as likely to murderhobo the town guards and defecate in the fountain as they are to do anything useful.

>>49473267

No. Elves are inscrutable and otherworldly fair folk, and do not associate with men under anything but the most unusual of circumstances.

This is non-negotiable.

>>49473309

So what IS acceptable? Humans and only humans?

>>49473248
>The fantastical elements of a setting should exist along it's liminal zones
So play a setting like that, where dragonborn would be scarce. 5E takes the High Fantasy road and sets itself in Faerun, where magic has forged nations, made flying cities, slain gods, and ended the world more than once.

>>49473308

>Thats retarded. The GM isn't just there to be the player's bitch for whatever autistic lol-so-random fantasies the players want to go on.

That's....that's literally the job of a DM, though. The players say they want to do 'X', and the DM tells them what happens, using dice.

And sometimes "what happens" isn't something the character/player wanted to happen, but it should still be a logical consequence of what they wanted to do, not something you vetoed because Not Muh DnD.

>>49468772
Because you think of them as stereotypes rather than a people with culture and society. There are dwarves that do everything that humans already do.

One of the silliest fantasy troupes I know is that where an entire race is involved and practically in complete control over one market. Like, all dwarves are bankers and their banking system is used all over the world. That's something you'd read in a modern fairy tale, not something you'll be able to find in the real world nor in mythologies. Some dwarves are probably bankers, but it's not collectively owned and run by the entire race, and they probably have more than one, and there are probably competitors that aren't dwarves.

File: thretard.gif~c200.gif (44KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 200x200px

>>49473341
So if the players are in middle earth and they want to play a klingon that should be ok because its what the players want?

Should the klingons also be able to be jedi because fuck continuity?

Its like the DM is the only sane person in a gaggle of retards.

>>49473319

As a player race option, generally yes. Although "human" isn't an option, and is instead divided into different ethnic groupings.

Exceptions might be made for playing a non-human, but it will usually involve a serious compromise... i.e., a Goblin sidekick or Ogre bodyguard or something. And if they don't play it right, they're getting killed off.

>>49468937
>don't you set your games in larger, metropolitan cities?
No such thing exists in my setting. The largest cities in the word house maybe a few thousand people at best, and the only foreigners that show up are nobles and merchants.

>>49468869
>
So you end up with streets and adventuring parties full of dragon men, elves from the underdark, and infernally-warped humanoids.

...and?

>>49473408

Well, that's boring as fuck/doesn't really fit D&D (Which this thread is about)

>>49473424
Are you one of those players that would bitch if you played a drow and when you went into a city the guards attacked and tried to kill you on sight?

>>49473367

>So if the players are in middle earth and they want to play a klingon that should be ok because its what the players want?

Star Trek characters go back in time every five episodes. Sure, some Klingons landed in Gondor. If that's what the player's wanna do, then sure (If 3 players want Middle Earth and one wants Klingons, that's a different and thornier scenario, but here you're just saying that players shouldn't be allowed to do what doesn't appeal to you personally). You could probably make a pretty fun campaign with a bunch of Klingons accidentally transported into Gondor trying to figure out what the fuck was even going on. Everyone would have fun, if you didn't just shoot the idea down because all the players have to bow to you the mighty DM. (And if players are bucking your ideas that hard, it's not a good sign for your DMing ability; you're boring them)

And anyway, Gary fucking Gygax had a friend who wanted to play a cowboy and he was like "Sure, fuck it". This kind of high fantasy freewheeling is part of DnD's DNA.

>>49473444
No, not at all.

But I generally don't play in FR settings, so, Dark Elves can be whatever you want. I like Dunmer, myself.

>>49473429

Non-Human PC's were a last-minute inclusion to 1st edition, and only done so begrudgingly to make the game more marketable to players who wanted to ape the Fellowship of the Ring.

>Well, that's boring as fuck
I'd be the best DM you ever had. It would blow your mind. Afterwards, you would return home and burn all your old character sheets.

>>49473444
Not him, but my dark elf would back off and proclaim their renegade status. If they still refuse entry/remain hostile etc., he'd retreat. I as a player would not complain in the least. It'd fly in some places and not others.
If it was appropriate, I'd ask to make a diplomacy attempt.

>>49473459
I'm gonna be perfectly honest man, and I'm not trying to be a dick but I can't tell if you're trolling or not.

Most of my PCs want a consistant universe, but I have one player who wants to be the (in my opinion) most retarded shit possible. See aformentioned grippli paladin in a party where everyone else is a core race.

Hes one of those people who will do lolsorandom shit just to do it. The kind of player that ruins chaotic neutral.

>>49473476
>Non-Human PC's were a last-minute inclusion to 1st edition
File that under "things that literally don't matter".
Playing other races is valid, fun, and interesting.
>I'd be the best DM you ever had
And I'm a nigerian prince, and also a dog.

>>49473512
Thats racist, yo.

>>49473494

>I'm gonna be perfectly honest man, and I'm not trying to be a dick but I can't tell if you're trolling or not.

I'm not trolling, but I think we're talking about different things and that's the source of the confusion.

>Most of my PCs want a consistant universe, but I have one player who wants to be the (in my opinion) most retarded shit possible

I thought you meant "the players" as in all of them, in agreement. If three players and a DM want serious LotR and one guy wants to be a frog with anime adventures, then frog guy should bend to the will of the majority (with the DM throwing him some kind of bone, if appropriate), or find a group better suited to his tastes.

If the players, collectively, want to be Klingons in Gondor, and it's the DM who wants to play a serious game, then it's the DM who should either bend or find a new group.

You were phrasing it like you were unilaterally banning the players from playing anything you deemed "retarded", and I'm making the argument that good DnD is a lot more of a democracy than that.

>>49473512

>And I'm a nigerian prince

Interesting choice. Welcome to the party :^)

>and also a dog.

You can have an animal companion.

>>49473299
That sounds like a cool campaign.

Are there paladin hall monitors who hunt the wicked with holy fury?

So according to this thread, the DM's not allowed to choose how things work in their world?

What happens if you can choose any race from the books but they're reskinned as fantasy human cultures?

>>49473684
>in our culture, we BREATH JETS OF FIRE AND POISON RAAAAWR

>>49467768
from what i know in fifth tieflings have an ancestor that made a pact with demons for power, but as a cost were cursed with the appearance of demons, which was passed down by blood

File: Fire_breathing_20060715_7010.jpg (260KB, 1508x1784px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 1508x1784px

>>49473719
Well, why not?

>>49473719
It's chemicals and shit, arbitrarily limited to X number of times per day because they singe your throat something savage.

File: dungeons-dragons_L155.jpg (59KB, 628x480px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 628x480px

>>49473684
Gm's exist to amuse their autistic players. Thats what I'm learning.

These are the kind of fa/tg/uys who believe any planning on the DM's part is railroading.

>>49467481
I'm much more OK with Tieflings as Core than Half-Orcs. Why? Because Half-Orcs are just watered down Orcs, and their entire reason for existing is in-canon raperaperape. I just don't feel all that comfortable with their being an entire race of rape-babies. Especially not when you could just play Orc instead, and these cunts are only there as some shitty half-measure.

Realistically speaking, neither of the halfies and the Tieflings should be very populous. The other thing I dislike about halfies is that they preload the entire "who can reproduce with whom" discussion that's just better kept in the background in 99% of the games.

Seriously, these things are just way too close to Magical Realm. I know they aren't, but it still sounds exactly the same.

>>49473875
I will say that rampant rape-babies is more appropriate for a gritty fantasy setting... Which isn't at all what DND/Pathfinder tries to be.

>>49473875
>Especially not when you could just play Orc instead
By the canon, orcs are an evil race made by an evil god, and don't have free will. Gruumsh commands them to be evil and they can't say no to their creator god. Gruumsh's voice rings through their ears at every hour.
(Half-orcs just have echoes of Gruumsh's yelling in their dreams, they gain the capacity to resist him.)
There's a reason killing orc babies is okay.

>>49473776
And if you let the diverge and resort to pulling shit out of your ass, drawing maps as they open doors, suddenly you're not putting in the effort...

File: fucking-fascists-this-wasnt-real-communism-tru-sarma-2825614.png (181KB, 500x767px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 500x767px

>>49467579
If you hate D&d, why do you play it?

>>49473902
It's weird, but I'm much more likely to have rampant body horror and mutation and untimely death in a game than rape.

I'm 99% sure this is because I don't want to have to narrate a rape scene, and fading to black feels like a coward's way out.

>>49473953
Which canon? You know anybody can change that in their game, right?

>>49473981
So let them play orcs in their game, faggot. Why do you have a single fucking worry about what's "core" and what isn't if you're going to homebrew? It has no impact on you. Core matters only when you're using the core setting.

>>49473902
I suppose it's a hold-over from when it was. But there's also this description for Ogres or something, that describes the border between human and Ogre land as a perpetually raped wasteland. It all seems a little over the top, even for gritty Fantasy. Even something as tryhard as Got/SoIaF isn't shouting "rape" as much.

>>49473953
Sure enough, I know they are a cop-out, but I don't have to like it. If people want to play monsters, let them play monsters.

Of course, literally Evil monsters are a bit of a cop-out as well. Nice enough to hack your way through, but they'll never be more than that. Personally, I prefer my own interpretation of Orcs: Orcs as Mongols. Vicious, callous tribal hordes that are occasionally united under a single visionary who builds what looks like civilization to casual observers from the remnants of slaughtered kingdoms. A tottering empire ready to fall down, as soon as the newer generations of warriors grow up as kings, too soft to be the fighting force forged by dire circumstances they once were.

And ironically, that makes the perfect setting for Half-Orcs, given how much hanky-panky ol' Ghengis was known to be down for. One of their things was to just rape the women of a conquered town in the town square, while forcing them men to watch.

>>49474003
Yes, that was my point.
Faggot.

File: 1474534581930.jpg (59KB, 736x736px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 736x736px

>>49473975
Then you look them straight in the eye and you narrate that scene.

>>49473963
I hate new DND because they changed everything to add in dragon people because "LAWL DRAGONS R AWSUM!" I'm going back to 2e, I need my thac0

>>49474035
>hate new DND because they changed everything
Lel.

>>49474035
Go back to B/X, it's better.

>>49474041
They raped my childhood! I mean RPG

>>49474035
>they changed everything to add in dragon people
What? Dragonborn may be a little forced, but they don't really change anything. There still aren't notable dragonborn individuals. There's still dragons and lizardmen. Dragonborn are a little stronger than humans, but so are orcs, and they're not smarter, so they don't rule any kingdoms.

>>49474009
I like this reasoning. I use a similar one. It also helps keep the tech level fairly stagnant. As soon as a society gets advanced enough they are ground down by an orc horde and society is set back a couple hundred years. Just the way the gods like it to be.

File: e2cded548289fa995611d6ed2ad932e8[1].jpg (183KB, 817x890px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 817x890px

>>49474073
Aren't dragonborn basically just draconian's shoehorned into other settings?

>>49474073
I've always explained things like Dragonborn and tieflings being around to long lived magical beings really enjoy the night life in human cities.
Dragon polymorphes into a human, gets drunk, nails a bar maid, and makes a dragonborn.
Demon or Devil comes to the prime material plane to take a cooking class or to learn how to knit. Goes on a few dates with a milk maid. Boom, tiefling.

It happens often enough that most people just shake their head and mutter under their breath about extraplaner creatures leaving and never paying child support.

>>49474035

You might as well, if you liked older editions better. There's a whole huge OSR movement to look at.

>>49474102
Not really. They're pretty much just people with scaly skin, dragon heads, and claws. They don't have wings or tails and no express mention of horns.

>>49474141
Dragonborn definitely aren't Half-Dragons, who are significantly more powerful, inherit the nature of their draconic parent, and live much longer than humans.

>>49468006
>Average Grippli Adventure
>"Aaaaw my hands are all sticky!"
>"Am I blowing this? Oh God I'm blowing this!"

Etc.

Although, I think that's pretty great, and the image of it at least seems entertaining.

But what do I know, I'm one of those uncreative types that likes playing Tieflings.

I've always loved Devils and Devilish characters, hellish landscapes, occult, and mystic aesthetics. Not really sure why.

>>49474177
Setting flavor. If I have dragonborn then I do not have half dragons. Just because a race is in the books does not mean I have to include it.

File: collegehumor.14e9a8ba1f191d64f8172d0c059a212c.jpg (63KB, 600x744px)

63KB, 600x744px

>>49474162
You have literally changed my life.

>>49473248
>The fantastical elements of a setting should exist along it's liminal zones

HOW ABOUT FUCK YOU, YOU HUMONGOUS RETARD. THIS SEGREGATION OF SETTINGS INTO DIRTFARMER ZONES AND FUN ZONES IS THE MOST RETARDED, CANCEROUS AND ILLOGICAL BULLSHIT THE SHIT AUTHORS/WORLDBUILDERS EVER CAME UP WITH. THERE'S NO REASON SENSIBLE (unlike you), THINKING (unlike you) CREATURES WOULDN'T USE FREE SHIT HANGING BEFORE THEM. THIS EXACT GODDAMN DIVIDE IS THE REASON MOST D&D SETTINGS COME APART AT THE SEAMS - YOU CAN'T JUST HAVE DIRTTOWNBURG AND MAGICFUCKISTAN WITHIN THE DAY'S WALKING DISTANCE AND HAVE THEM NOT AFFECT EACH OTHER.

FURTHERMORE, THIS DOESN'T MAKE "FUN" PARTS MORE "FUN" BY SOME KIND OF CONTRAST. IT JUST MAKES "NOT FUN" PARTS MORE JARRING TO SLOG THROUGH. I DON'T PLAY D&D FOR EP 152367764745 OF SHITPOOP ADVENTURES: RATS IN THE BASEMENT EDITION - GIVE ME FUCKING FLOATING CASTLES, AIRSHIPS, LARGER-THAN-LIFE HEROES AND VILLAINS, VILLAGER BEGGARS WHO REALLY ARE SECRET WHATTHEFU MASTERS. GIVE ME HIGH FANTASY IF IT'S HIGH FANTASY. IF IT'S LOW FANTASY, COOL, I'LL MAKE A CHARACTER THAT FITS THE MOOD.

BUT FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, DO NOT MAKE YOUR SETTING A PATCHWORK OF "NORMAL" ZONES AND "HERE BE MAGIC" ZONES. YOU"RE NOT BEING SOME SORT OF MASTERMIND STORYTELLER BY DOING IT, YOU'RE JUST MAKING YOUR PLAYERS WISH THEY' DID SOMETHING MORE FUN RIGHT NOW, LIKE SELF-DECAPITATION WITH A RUSTY SPOON.

>>49474338
If you're not using the core setting, you have no reason to whine about what is and is not core.

File: count 1.jpg (27KB, 564x375px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 564x375px

>>49468709
>Sesame Street LotR reboot when?
One! One ring to rule them all! Ha ha ha ha!

>>49470188
Yes, Drizzt was really cool. The thing that made him cool was that he was extremely unique. Being a Drow who was rebelling against his societal expectations made him a maverick who really stood out.

That uniqueness is completely lost when 90% of PC Drow do the EXACT SAME THING. It's warped what we think of as essentially Drow.

Sometimes it feels like people would rather play in a super high magic version of a multicultural real life city than anything even remotely resembling the middle ages, legends or the fantasy books that inspired RPG's in a first place.

Even in a major city you will only be seeing merchants, skilled craftsmen and diplomats from other races/nations as a matter of course in any realistic setting, why would you turn it into a bland cosmopolitan mess instead? If a setting does not have visible half demons being mobbed on sight its either shit or way too high fantasy,

File: kitten-6.jpg (142KB, 1600x1200px)

142KB, 1600x1200px

>>49474646
A fucking men. Most nerds these days want to take anything thats remotely cool and throw it in a blender. Pirates fighting space alien ninjas who are trying to summon cthulhu? OMG BEST SETTING EVAR1!!!2@!12

Even though that setting makes no god damn sense. Even fantasy worlds need to be internally consistent. Thats what makes them believable, or rather, what allows us to suspend our disbelief. If the world has no consistency then it isn't something you can lose yourself in.

Also,
>>49474418
Don't pop a fucking blood vessel, skip.

>>49474646
>Sometimes it feels like people would rather play in a super high magic version of a multicultural real life city than anything even remotely resembling the middle ages
Yes that is precisly what people want. RPGs have evolved into their own beast entirely seperate from the literature that initially inspired it(and not all of it was "classic" fantasy and legends).
>>49474698
>Even though that setting makes no god damn sense. Even fantasy worlds need to be internally consistent.
RPGs were always filled with stuff like that. The idea that fantasy suddenly needs to start aping Lord of the Rings or some bumfuck slavic story 1:1 is relatively new.

And Pirates fighting space alien ninjas trying to summon Cthulhu can still be internally consistent, not necessarily "realistic" those are two different things.

Even baseline D&D was never full on medieval. It was more post apocalyptic.

>>49474646
>middle ages
The medieval periods sucked. I would not want to play in anything even remotely resembling the medieval period.
>legends
Legends are high fantasy as fuck and I would gladly play The Adventures of Cuchulainn and Arjuna in Jotunheim.
>fantasy books
Run every possible gamut you can possible mention, ridiculous insinuation.

>>49474737
Well, I can't attest to it being more 'post apocalyptic' but I'll take your word for it.

I know some people want that fantasy/sci-fi grab bag of ideas. But it isn't what I want.

I personally get turned off to those kind of stories and just think they're stupid. If you like them its your business, but its not for me.

File: 1456682499938.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>49474755

File: 1340842731407.jpg (132KB, 729x800px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 729x800px

>>49474646
>>49474698
>WAAAAAAHHHHH!!!! Stop liking what I don't like!

Do you faggots have any idea how fortunate you are? You can run your own game, with its own setting, without ANY influence from the outside world. You're not stuck to some Hollywood type deal that decides what you can consume, and that is it.

>>49474745
The some goes for you, chump. Medieval times were one of the coolest periods in world history, and if you think they're boring, YOU are the problem.

>>49474774
>, and if you think they're boring, YOU are the problem.
>>WAAAAAAHHHHH!!!! Stop liking what I don't like!
You're doing what you just complained about.

>>49474774
Someone on the internet disagrees with me and it is my god-given duty to correct them!

>>49474774
>Do you faggots have any idea how fortunate you are? You can run your own game, with its own setting, without ANY influence from the outside world
Sure.
Better off not using D&D for it, since D&D is coded towards upper-high fantasy with dragon gods and archdevils and such and such.

>>49474737
Then that is a huge problem. Most things go to shit when its being inspired by itself instead of the original works.

I don't understand how people who grew up reading Redwall and the Hobbit, watching Conan and Lord of the Rings can suddenly enjoy the high fantasy tripe DnD is peddling these days. That is the age range of your average DnD player, were these people just not fantasy fans before they played RPG's?

>>49474406
Woah, you didn't know?

The main OSR movement has become more of a comfortable niche now than its reactionary anti-3.5/4e heyday a few years ago, but it's still going. They had a hand in how 5e turned out, since Zak S (writes a ton of good OSR stuff) and the RPG Pundit (piece of shit self-proclaimed gatekeeper) were consultants.
As a result there's less reactionary "we're better than mainstream D&D" stuff and more actually useful vaguely system neutral content pouring out.

Good blogs to start with are "DnD with Porn Stars" (that's Zak S), "Goblin Punch", "False Machine", "Ten Foot Polemic", and "Middenmurk". Everyone links to everyone else so you can jump around the OSR blogosphere from there.

File: Sun Wukong and Jade Emperor.jpg (2MB, 1920x1076px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1076px

>>49474799
You've never seen a single mythology book in your life, have you? Just because all you know is swords and sandals low magic doesn't mean that that is all there is. Expand your horizons.

>>49474789
Well, yes, but that's the setting people use for their cosmopolitan Fantasy, and it lends itself excellently to it.

Though, if you look at history, a lot of empires were quite cosmopolitan in ways we'd consider "unrealistic" based on Medieval perceptions. Empires that conquer loads of other cultures just can't help it.

>>49474787
Yes it is, Anon. Nice of you to understand that.

>>49474778
Look, cunty-wunty, I've never seen someone who knew something about Medieval times and thought they were boring. It's always faggots who assume it's all that Monty Python sketch with people sitting in the mud. And you can't turn that shit around on me. I just told off people for saying the standard high Fantasy cosmopolitan setting is boring. The entire point is that blanket statements are utterly meaningless when it comes to shit like this.

>>49474833
I mean to be perfectly honest nothing is more boring than a conversation where everyone agrees.

>>49474799
>Then that is a huge problem. Most things go to shit when its being inspired by itself instead of the original works.
Not necessarily
>were these people just not fantasy fans before they played RPG's?
No they were, it's just that there's more to fantasy than Conan and Lord of the Rings. The idea of fantasy and sci-fi being distinct from one another is pretty fucking recent too.

>>49474830
>Expand your horizons

How about you stop being a condescending prick? What kind of idiot would assume I have not read things because I prefer the lower key fantasy of European legends and pre DnD fantasy stories?

And just because it happened in the myths of the setting does not mean it has to still be going on. Just look at Lord of the Rings, the story takes place in an age far removed from that stuff and when things from that era show up its a big deal.

And its not even relevant to what I was talking about either.

>>49474854
>How about you stop being a condescending prick? What kind of idiot would assume I have not read things because I prefer the lower key fantasy of European legends and pre DnD fantasy stories?
Because of your absurdly close-minded insinuations that one cannot or must not play other styles of fantasy? I cannot fathom why you insist what you prefer is the only thing that can be enjoyable. Have you never heard of "different strokes for different folks"?
>And just because it happened in the myths of the setting does not mean it has to still be going on
Doesn't mean it has to stop either.

>>49474854
>have not read things because I prefer the lower key fantasy of European legends and pre DnD fantasy stories?
Except that's still a REALLY fucking broad category full of stuff you don't like.

Besides this entire conversation is about D&D, so it's a moot point. D&D derives much of it's inspiration from science-fiction/science-fantasy stories since there was barely even a distinction between sci-fi and fantasy during it's inception. The hobby NEVER had it's roots in "muh low key European fantasy".

>>49470288
>The complaint that drizzt is the bad as the example elf is flawed though when you consider this

Dwarf example: Bruenor Battlehammer: Rich, Master Crafter, Stubborn and Hardy. Literally stereotype of a dwarf.
Regis: Sneaky, tubby, just wants to settle down, Stereotype of a halfling
Drizzt: Stealthy, forest type, stereotype of an elf.

>>49474422
Hey look the exact reason OP is a faggot.

>>49474698
>Even fantasy worlds need to be internally consistent.

Pirates fighting space alien ninjas who are trying to summon cthulhu can easily be made consistent.

>>49469936
I'd enjoy an all-hobgobbo campaign about conquest of some clichea lands and control of squads'n'terrritory... D&D is probably not the best system for it tho

>>49473684
DMs are free to do so. But here's the kicker: Why would you go through the effort of converting an entire system or setting to dig what you want if there's another edition or system entirely that's much closer to what you want to begin with?

>>49475465
Because D&D is setting agnostic for the most part, it's just a fantasy game.

And maybe it's the closets to what the want in the first place?

>stop liking things that I don't like!

>>49474418
Try Exalted, it's focused around stuff you described

>>49467790
Dwarves and elves are probably more special snowflakes than half-demons.

>>49475525
Elves can be, depends on how they are approached. Drizzit is, afterall, the original snowflake D&D character.

Dwarfs are just a race for fat bearded guys to play an entire race of fat bearded guys. I don't get how you would think anything else.

Here lies:
Meaning of the word "Special snowflake"

>>49475531
Damn man, gods and demons breeding with mortals are some of the oldest tales in history. Not fantasy neckbeards nor sterile mary sues.

>>49475567
No, that's a halftruth. Demigods are the standard for epic myth, anything resembling Tieflings are absolutely not.

I have no problem with Demigods, Baldur's Gate is the only D&D I even still play.

>>49467372
>Fucking Drizzt is their exapple of an elf.
Lying is wrong, lad

File: 1425969102072.jpg (58KB, 625x351px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 625x351px

>>49467372
I don't think I'll ever find that holy grail of an RPG that
>Players want to learn
>Doesn't have its balance easily busted in half
>Has enough crunch to feel like an actual game
>Doesn't take 3 days of optimizing to make a character
>Doesn't require gimmicky bullshit that makes it impossible to play online if need be

File: IMG_2989.jpg (145KB, 440x625px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 440x625px

>>49473258
Once you let someone be a frog, someone else is gonna want to be a duck.

File: yee.png (120KB, 275x311px)

120KB, 275x311px

>>49467605
That half-orc.

>>49467372
>Every time I try to look into D&D 5e I realize tieflings and dragonborn are core races now and I start to lose interest.

Sounds more like a personal problem than anything related to age.

File: Frog.jpg (30KB, 310x350px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 310x350px

>>49468006
>grippli paladin
I'm not seeing the issue.

>>49475702
Well, if you're under the impression that you're playing a heroic fantasy game but a quarter of the options are some sort of monster it makes you question what you're doing.

Unrelated: what's with the plague of "none left" captcha bullshit? I'm not doing that. Get your shit together, nipmoot.

>>49475479
>Because D&D is setting agnostic for the most part
D&D is only setting agnostic for as much as it's a system that only works for D&D's particular brand of high fantasy. But that's still besides the point. Why would you go through the hassle of removing and adding races to the core of 5th if 2nd or 3rd edition already have the ones you want, for example?

>>49475722
>you're playing a heroic fantasy game but a quarter of the options are some sort of monster it makes you question what you're doing.
Who defines what "monster" is? Why can't a dragonborn or tiefling do something heroic? You have a really narrowminded idea of what heroic fantasy is.

Shit the only thing that makes something a "monster" in D&D is not having your HP defined by your class levels.

>>49475752
I may enjoy 5e's mechanics more?

>>49475722
>a heroic fantasy game
So on one exept for humans, humans wth pointy ears and short, bearded humans allowed?

>>49475778
The funny thing is that elves were basically monsters until LoTR. Stealing children and shit.

>>49467372
>Is this how 2nd ed players felt about half-orcs being added as a core race?
>Doesn't know that half-orcs were in 1st edition
OP, get your faggity ass of my dam lawn!

File: 13007346_1150021428354660_1969818706425158753_n.jpg (89KB, 640x960px)

89KB, 640x960px

I think the OP's point is getting lost in a lot of bickering an minutia (or at least what I see his point as being).

There's nothing inherently wrong with running a DnD game where your players can play Dragonborn or Tieflings (or Half-orcs or Gnomes or any other race besides the Holy Trinity of Human, Elf, and Dwarf). There have been rules for both of those races for a while and there's never been anything stopping a Dungeon Master from including or not including any race in their settings.

The issue isn't that players can be these races. The issue is that they're in the Core Rule Books and there's nothing stipulating that they may or may not be included in the game.

For most players (especially but not limited to beginners) if something is in a Core book then it's allowed, and if your DM tells you otherwise they're "breaking the rules" or something. For a less experienced DM the world presented to them in the Core books is the "default" setting. I think most of us agree here that this isn't the correct way to approach this sort of thing, but you're deluding yourself if you don't admit that there are TONS of players who do exactly that. Tieflings and Dragonborn present a significant departure from the traditional High-Fantasy setting and making them part of the default forever alters the community's perception of what a traditional High-Fantasy setting is like.

I think what OP wants is for races like Teiflings and Dragonborn to be more optional; the rules for playing them should be in one of the non-core books like they always had been prior to 5th Edition.

>>49475753
Gee I don't know, I think I'd have to classify Dragons and Demons as "monsters". In fact, they'd be at the top of the list.

I am, by the way, fully in the camp of "play anything the GM lets you". Having monsters are "core races" is really dumb though, I agree with the OP on that.

>>49475898
I honestly feel like the best solution is to have a section about how it's important to mix and match stuff to create a world you want.

Like I was reading about 5e Psionics(I much prefer psionics to traditional magic in fantasy stories every since 3.5) and got mad about how half the fucking fluff was about how rare and totally optional it was. I thought it was pretty fucking unfair to mark a (relatively balanced) option like that.

They wouldn't DARE put a fucking section saying how your world can totally do without Wizards or Druids.

>>49475909
Except tieflings and dragonborn aren't dragons and demons. They're tieflings and dragonborn.

File: READTHIS.jpg (189KB, 439x751px)

189KB, 439x751px

>>49475898
>the rules for playing them should be in one of the non-core books
Eh, why? Just because OP can't read words "UNCOMMON RACES" and specifically does not understand what "they don't exist in every world" means? How aboout no.

>>49475928
I'm of the opinion that a setting should have magic OR psionics.

>>49475898

You can literally make a case for that shit when it comes to any race in the CRB that isn't a human.

Elves, dwarves, and halflings had limits to how high they could take their class levels due to Gygax wanting more people to play humans.

Half-orcs and half-elves were met with derision because they were effectively "humans but X"

A lot of people hate gnomes and feel as though they serve no purpose since halflings already fill the niche of "small person with bonuses to DEX" niche.

To say nothing on more uncommon races like Kender, Kitsune, or Grippli.

At the end of the day, why bother getting so hung up about it? If Dragonborns, frog-people, elves, and gnomes live in the same place, who gives a shit?

A slight bonus to two stat points and a few extra flavoring doesn't make them bad and the issues associated with them tends to be a player issue more often than not.

>>49475909
>Dragons and Demons as "monsters"
But dragonborn are not dragons (not even related), and tieflings are not demons.

>>49475909

Dragons and Demons are monsters.

Tiefling are not demons.

Dragonborn are not dragons.

Ergo, Tieflings and Dragonborn are not monsters.

>>49475973
I still don't get the point of half-elves. They serve no purpose other than another excuse to have some sort of mopey loner backstory.

>>49475960
>Eh, why?

Read the post you're replying to, please.

>>49475973
>A slight bonus to two stat points and a few extra flavoring doesn't make them bad
It does.
>the issues associated with them tends to be a player issue
And this too. Players should not be allowed to play monster races at all.

>>49475988
It's obviously supposed to be an allegory for someone being of mixed race/heritage.

>>49475989
Please. Just because someone thinks that THIS IS IN COREBOOK YOU CAN'T RESTRICT IT doesn't make it true. And uncommon races are specifically said to be rare and not in every world.

>>49476000
Meanwhile actual mulattoes LARP that they are straight out of Africa black.

>>49475997
>It does.
Why is a Dragonborns +2 so much worse than an Elf's +2?

>>49475997
Why?

>>49472597
5e, even Core, isn't actually tied to the Forgotten Realms.

>>49476023
Because I said so.

>>49475997

Dragonborn are as much dragons as Elves are fae, half-orcs are goblinoids, or Tieflings are demons.

Besides, humans start off with the most variance of any race and are commonly used by min-maxers because of how customizable they are yet nobody gives a shit about people playing humans.

>>49475979
>>49475987
>Tieflings prefer to eat only meat, blood, bone and marrow, preferably raw. They enjoy balaena blubber, gristly, and even roasted insects...they drink strange strange concoctions of broth, oil, and sulphur, and firewater...when meat is unavailable, they can live for short periods on ashes, coal, and other mineral matter.

Yeah, Tieflings are "not-demons", and Dragonborn are "not-dragons". That's the whole point. The only difference is technicality.

>>49476061
What.

>>49476061
And demons don't need to eat at all.

>>49476068
>What?

Playing a flesh-eating monster that can also survive on the stuff of the hell that spawned it is just outside of the bounds of what should be "core" in a heroic fantasy game.

>>49476061

>non-human races act like non-humans

Whodathunk?

>>49476103
Where did you get this? And why do you think this applies to every tiefling in every world?

>>49476103

That's a big fucking leap famalam.

>>49468006
>Grippli Paladin
>Miniature Hippo mount

why do you hate fun?

WHY DO YOU HATE FUN?!

>>49468383
>>49468470
You forgot wood elves (which are distinct from wild elves), sky elves, and probably a whole bunch of other obscure elf subraces.

It's not that other races don't have subraces (there's a couple of different dwarves and halflings in DnD as well), but elves have an order of magnitude more, and elves coming in a ton of varieties seems to have become a part of the standard elf traits. Almost all fantasy settings with elves do the regular elf/dark elf split, and lot of them have three different elf archetypes (wood, dark, and high elves). And that's not getting into all the weird settin-specific elf types. Ice elves, fire elves, golden elves, silver elves, night elves, dwarf elves, left-handed elves...
Dwarves, by comparison, only come in one variety regardless of setting.

>>49476118
Planescape Monstrous Compendium Appendix. Its the one with the very sexy Tiefling art by Di'Terlizzi

>>49476136

Gets in the way of "muh super cereal narrative."

Rule of thumb, anyone who takes themselves seriously tend to be the worse people to be around.

>>49476141
>dwarf elves
You mean humans?

>>49476149
>Planescape Monstrous Compendium Appendix
Eh. Still don't see how this applies to other editions and game worlds.

>>49476177
It doesn't. 4e completely retconned them. But that's what Tieflings "are", and retconning or reworking them is just whitewashing them.

I think Tieflings are really cool by the way, and always have.

>>49476196
>But that's what Tieflings "are"
No? Just because you like this piece of old fluff does not make it universal truth.

>>49476151
In Elder Scrolls the race commonly known as dwarves are actually a type of elf (properly known as dwemer or deep elves). Technically, the cat people are also elves.

>>49476216
I'm not saying its the universal truth. I'm saying, that's the original Tiefling. Retcons are the watered down, kid-friendly version. Which is even worse.

>>49476196

>But that's what Tieflings "are", and retconning or reworking them is just whitewashing them.

Welcome to D&D faggot.

Y'think elves were always tall, blond, and beautiful? Guess again nerd!

Y'think dwarves were always short, drunk, and industrious? Guess again nerd!

Y'think gnomes were always short insane faggots who are lolsorandumb? Guess again nerd!

Point is, D&D does whatever the fuck it wants with any mythological creature they can get their hands on. Hell, if Cthulhu didn't get removed from earlier editions, we'd probably be able to play as fish people who shoot elder signs out of their dick hole by now.

>>49476238
Those races are all those things though? Settings where they aren't, such as Dark Sun, are explicitly "not core".

>>49474035
I always just fluff them as lizard men, and restrict choices to black and green. Nobody's ever minded. Tieflings are just not allowed, but that's a unanimous group decision.

>>49473657

There are now.

>>49476250

Elves in old mythologies used to crawl people's homes and steal their children.

Gnomes used to be earth elemental in the same vein as salamanders, sylphs, and undines.

And there are even some myths that paint Dwarves as being rapists who target goddesses.

Yet in D&D, we now know them as "pointy-eared human," "short annoying faggot," and "Scottish manlet."

Which, tbqhfam is a slap to the fucking face when you consider how rich each races mythologies are, and yet the best that D&D can do is make them not!humans.

>>49476304
>best that D&D can do is make them not!humans.

Because the point of D&D is heroic fantasy, not playing a monstrous rapist or child abductor.

Elves in Tolkien are basically proto-humans, or a sort of stand-in for the Hyperborean ancestors of the Aryan peoples. And Dwarves are a clumsy imitation.

>>49476329

Stop using "muh heroic fantasy" as a fucking crutch for a moment and consider the abilities that these races would have to have in order to do the shit that they could in their mythologies.

Elves would probably have something like an innate ability to cast [move without trace], [silence], and [invisibility] so many times per day.

Dwarves would probably have high STR and CON to catch up to beings that were literally godlike and actually rape them.

While gnomes would probably have some innate earth magic affinity, which could manifest as shit like a falling boulder just so happens to roll in a way to deal less damage or their crops growing twice as fast and during any season.

I mean, it'd obviously take some balancing but at least it's more interesting and distinctive than what we got.

>>49476304
>tbqhfam is a slap to the fucking face when you consider how rich each races mythologies are
Hah, no. If you want to play as child rapist, it doesn't mean everyone wants too.

>>49476377
>at least it's more interesting and distinctive
Well, not really.

>>49476386

The point
Your head

>>49476393

How so?

File: bat crime.png (48KB, 644x406px)

48KB, 644x406px

>>49467605
>half-orc is saying "BAZINGA!"

Pretty accurate illustration to be honest

>>49476377
D&D isn't really based on mythology though, beyond pilfering some monsters. Or else you'd have way more demi-gods running around. Which is fine and cool, but not what D&D has ever been.

>>49476426
>Or else you'd have way more demi-gods running around.
I was going to say 'What do you think high-level AD&D characters are?', but the I remembered Achilles was level 100.

>>49476413
Because after "balancing" all this we would get the same elves, dwarves and whatever as they are now. And in mythology they are nothing more than another sort of boogeyman. Which kind of makes them more like monsters players would kill for exp rather than playable races.

>>49476426

Then why get hung up on how tieflings were "white-washed" then?

>>49476453

So what you're saying is, all races that aren't human are basically monster races?

>>49476473
>all races that aren't human are basically monster races?
>that aren't human
Humans are in the Monster Manual for a reason, Anon.

>>49476473
In mythology? Yes.

>>49476487

So anything can be a PC then?

>>49476499

Would you count Perseus and Hercules as true-blue humans though?

>>49476466
Because this thread is an excuse to argue in a friendly manner about things that ultimately don't matter.

I would point out though that Tieflings are from D&D. I'm not referencing a myth when I talk about them. Their more obvious outsider characteristics are what made them cool. Being a human with horns is incredibly lame and is just an excuse to play an especially edgy not-human. It'd be like if a race of watered down Vampires were core.

>>49476505
[Playable Races]∩[All Monsters]=[Playable Races]

One is a subset of the other.

>>49476527

There are dhampirs in pathfinder that were basically half-vampires.

>>49476535

You just said that humans were in the monster manual though.

So if every race is in the monster manual, it means that either every race has the potential to be a monster or every race has the potential to be playable.

Otherwise, why have a distinction between a player wizard and an enemy lich, especially since there's nothing stopping the PC wizard from becoming a lich later on anyways?

>>49476588
>there's nothing stopping the PC wizard from becoming a lich later on anyways?

The DM?

Do they have explicit rules governing that now? Because before it was just vague "unspeakably evil" ceremonies.

>>49476588
>every race has the potential to be a monster
This is exactly what I said. It's not my fault you can't understand set notation.

>>49476610

So every race has the potential to be monstrous, why can't sentient creatures like dragons and demons be PCs?

>>49476632
Because fuck you, that's why.

>>49476637

Can you give an actual reason?

>>49476632
Because you're a dirty non-OD&D-playing pillock, that's why.

Other Character Types: There is no reason that players cannot be allowed to
play as virtually anything, provided they begin relatively weak and work up to
the top, i.e., a player wishing to be a Dragon would have to begin as, let us say,
a “young” one and progress upwards in the usual manner, steps being predetermined
by the campaign referee.

>>49468994
>>49467674
Y'all know the core rulebook itself says the uncommon races (dragonborn, gnomes, half-fuckers and tieflings) don't even exist in some settings and that they might not be available, right?

They're there because they're prominent enough elements in Forgotten Realms to be worth mentioning, and FR is the default setting for 5E.

>>49476632
They can, the entire argument is over them being "core".

>>49476645
Game balance.

>>49476645
Because you're dealing with massively different power levels between an adult dragon, an adult dretch, and an adult elf.

If 3e's level adjustment system had actually worked, that would have been a solution. As it stands, just go play GURPS Dungeon Fantasy with the point value cranked up.

>>49476664
There should be no core races other than humans. Everything esle is for speshul snowflakes.

>>49476669
>>49476679

Oh yeah, wouldn't want to have balance issues in a game where mages are fundementally better than every martial in every situation.

Perish the thought.

>>49476707
You seem to be mistaken. 3.X is a game about character building, the adventuring rules are just there for a little diversion.

>>49476707
>mages are fundementally better than every martial in every situation

One thing I noticed about 3.x that really put divine casters so high above martials is how much better their attack progression is than in 2e. They get better to hit and more attacks. In 2e they can take a hit, but they really can't dish them out even close to as well.

>>49476664

If we go by core, I could technically play an awakened animal since there are stats for shit like dogs, cats, and boars and the awakened spell is written right there.

>>49475531
Dwarves are the special snowflakes of neckbeard

>>49476527

4e has a race of this is the heroes of shadow book.

You aren't a dhampir, largely to allow the .... Interesting vampire class to be viable choice fluffize.

Or they may ha just burned the name on a feat chain.

>>49475722
>not turning on legacy captcha
Don't call it a grave, you dug your bed

>>49476968
Little of column A, little of B

>>49471283
What the fuck?
Why?

>>49473308
>I AIN'T BE NOBODY'S BITCH, CUZ
Fuck off with your shitty masculine compensation, faggot. The GM is a game facilitator and his job is to facilitate the player's fun as well as his own. The fact you even denegrate parties that don't "do anything useful" is just further indication that roleplaying games that accomplish nothing in themselves is not a hobby for you. A given "seasoned" GM might give a shit about cringing, but any GM worth a damn won't.

>>49468709
They tend to look at characters like a final fantasy party, each one has to be different in an instantly viable manner, and they end up with all the same fake character depth for it. That's not to say you can't do well with it, we had an ork weird boy in our rogue trader group and it fucking worked because he played up how out of place he was and made him craven over it, when an inquisitor was on board he was skrawling "sankchuned" on everything he owned

>>49476262
>>49473657
>hall monitors
Too small fry. Paladins are bigger than that. Student council members. The hall monitors are just their minions.

>>49473776
GMs run games to have fun with their friends. If you have no respect for your "autistic players" why are you running for them in the first place? That's pathetic.

>>49475588
You do know that Merlin, that classic non-Gandalf example of how wizards work, was half-demon, right? That doesn't sound anything like a Tiefling to you?

>>49473684
These guys are just players who don't want their GM to tell them no. I know because I was one of them many years ago.

The way you deal with them is by putting your foot down so they know your decision is final and they won't get what they want by bitching at you. Also ignore all the players online who get ass-ravaged the moment someone restricts any character option at all.

>>49477808
>That doesn't sound anything like a Tiefling to you?
Merlin didn't have horns, red skin, a tail, or any physical traits associated with demons. And he certainly wasn't going around advertising his heritage or pretending anyone would be okay with that.

>>49477830
>And he certainly wasn't going around advertising his heritage or pretending anyone would be okay with that.
But there's nothing about playing a Tiefling that requires them to do this in the first place. Why are you assuming that this would be a problem? You could say the same thing about half-elves for heaven's sake.
>Merlin didn't have horns, red skin, a tail, or any physical traits associated with demons.
Yes, and? Mythological or ancient depictions of a lot of races -- elves and gnomes and dwarves have already been mentioned in this thread -- can differ greatly from their original depiction. It's also true that the depiction of Tieflings varies greatly from setting to setting: I believe I came across someone the other day talking about playing in a setting where Tieflings could essentially pass as human, because their horns weren't very large and could be concealed with a hood. Nothing too radical, they just made them subtler. Why is that still unacceptable?

The argument is hinged on "these races should be monstrous, and should not be available as playable races." The problem with that is that what is and is not "monstrous" isn't exactly cut in stone between myths, legends, or modern fantasy tales even. In Beowulf, is Grendel a monster or a man? What about his mother? Are they both, or in between somewhere? Both are mentioned having monstrous ancestry, but yet they are also from the cursed line of Cain, a man. So are they perhaps just cursed humans? Would you let somebody play as whatever Grendel is?

This kind of abstract limitation on what is and is not acceptable as player characters is based more on tyrannical GM's opinions on how best to punish players for "bitching" about what they'd like to play than it is on any kind of consensus in myth, legend, or modern fantasy literature.

>>49478061
>Would you let somebody play as whatever Grendel is?
>Would you let somebody play as whatever tarrasque is?

>>49478170
Hope you didn't hurt yourself making that jump

>>49478170
I think you're confusing Grendel for Grendel's mother. Grendel was a humanoid. He's far closer to, say, an orc or an ogre than a fucking tarrasque.

>>49478061
>players online who get ass-ravaged the moment someone restricts any character option at all.
This is exactly what I'm talking about.

If you listen to these people, you won't be able to run anything except fantasy kitchen sinks because they'll try to pressure you into allowing everything regardless of how little sense it makes for the campaign you're planning.

>>49478170
You could easily play Grendel as a half orc.

>>49478317
...You didn't even read his post, did you?

>>49478364
>...You didn't even read his post, did you?
Looks like just another rant trying to call GMs tyrants for restricting him from playing monster races.

>>49478438
I would suggest reading the post instead of screaming about HUH U R BUTTHURT and the like.

>>49478438
Don't be a willfully ignorant idiot.

>>49478170
If the player wants to play as a tarrasque, why the fuck shouldn't it be allowed?

>>49473309
>Elves are fair folk
Fuck off with this already.

>>49478438
Well, no, that's not what I was saying at all.
I'm not asking you to let people play monster races, or even to let people play tieflings or other uncommon races in your games. What I am saying is that the insinuation that they have no grounds for wanting to play as a race that may appear monstrous (dragonborn, tiefling, half-orc) is not supported by the various editions of D&D as a series of systems, the fantasy literature which inspired D&D, and the mythological tales that inspired both, in spite of claims to the contrary ITT.

>>49478267
To clarify this post, I should mention that Grendel's mother was also humanoid. This post seemed to imply otherwise so I needed to fix that. I meant that Grendel's mother is a threat more readily compared to a tarrasque than Grendel himself, although I still don't think she's quite that big.

>>49478707
>Tarrasque
>INT 3
Might be tricky to pull off for a political campaign IMO

>>49468152
Dnd 3.5e

Half-Orc Fighter/Barbarian
20str, 2 handed weapon, Power Attack

Will likely hit at least half the time for 1d10+7(from strength bonus and 1.5x multiplier for 2handed weapon)+BAB up to 5. Compared to a wizard and others that is a lot of damage at lower levels and they can produce this damage consistently were as the wizard or sorceror blows their load and becomes a shittier version of a ranger.

You cannot tell me that 3-4 spells a day that do 1d4+1 or 2d6 damage are equal to a 9-18 damager per hit range melee attack at lvl 1.

Not even going to get into the argument about how it changes at higher levels, that can be handled by not having a garbage DM.

>>49479562
Wizards aren't supposed to be to deal massive amount of damage. I don't get your fucking point? A Wizard can knockout and coup de grace 4 people a spell with Sleep? Why are you comparing to entirely different class roles?

What are you even trying to argue? Half-Orcs are good at meleeing. Elves are good at wizarding.

>>49479562
>Not even going to get into the argument about how it changes at higher levels, that can be handled by not having a garbage DM.
Also do you think evokers shouldn't exist?

You sound like one of those people that bitch about how terrible 3.5 is but doesn't actually understand how the game fucking functions.

File: 1329591112299.jpg (49KB, 259x236px)

49KB, 259x236px

>>49473258
>>49473341
>>49477255
Running a game isn't a charity case, faggot, and I want to have fun too. That doesn't mean "let the players do whatever they want, that way they'll be happy." How bad did your parents fuck up to make you think that way?

Is this just 3.PF philosophy or are actual humans this maladjusted?

>>49475898
Apparently you and Op both need to learn to read, it literally says that the uncommon races aren't in every world.

Also as a DM learn to sack up, I wanted to do a more traditional fae campaign, no elves or gnomes. No objections from group because I don't play with a bunch of sad little man-children.

>>49476603
The nearest thing I've seen is in the Curse of Strahd game, there is a temple filled with forbidden knowledge and demonic shadows that offer power for a price, many of it to the note of "Food you touch tastes like ash, but the first you can cast raise dead three times for free." or "You gain +2 constitution and blindvision to 30ft, but your eyes rot out and cannot be healed."

At the very end there are three larger altars, one of them offers the secrets to lichdom but you need to be a 18th level spellcaster to even find out the ritual, and it's a 1-10 level campaign.

File: tumblr_mh9nwv366R1qz77zro1_500.jpg (142KB, 500x667px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 500x667px

>>49475898
You're one smart man. Was pretty much my point.

>>49476603
3.PF states you just need to have a caster level of 11 and craft a phylactery worth X amount of GP.

>>49475752

Because I wanted to play 5e?

>>49480208
Makes sense to me, just establish the limitations of the setting beforehand, anyone who doesn't like it doesn't have to play

>>49468299
Die.

>>49479562

Damage is the most inefficient and most uninteresting way to end an encounter son.

Unless you can OTK anything you fight, you're better off just letting the mage deal with it.

>>49479974

>Gets mad at having to readjust his world a tiny itty bitty bit
>Calls others maladjusted

File: spiderzero_quadruped26.jpg (124KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 600x800px

My generic approach for fantasy games is:

>humans only for the first round of characters
>elves, dwarves, and other core "demihumans" are unheard of, at least in the form they take in the core book
>there are remote enclaves with all kinds of weird people. If you encounter them, you can recruit them as followers, or even retire your character and begin play as one of the new creatures

Usually my nonhuman races are inspired by a good picture.

I enjoy a sword and sorcery milieu, so regardless of how much gonzo weirdness there is, I prefer there to be a core of mundanity where you're playing human beings who have to breathe air and eat food.

>>49480590
He's right though.

Any player who is so attached to the notion of playing their character concept that they can't have fun without getting exactly what they want is almost certainly a bad player, and they'll probably be disappointed anyways when you don't follow the script they had in their head.

It's the same issue with players who want to be "The Chosen One" or start play as the king of a major realm.

I can run a setting where anything goes (ie, Sigil or some kind of transdimensional crossroads). If that's the case, then it's part of the fun to have a party with a clockwork man, a humanoid lizard, a vampires, and an astronaut from Earth who got lost.

But if I invite you to play a game about Vikings settling a mysterious new continent, your lizardman ninja is not welcome.

>>49476196

I hate the mechanics of 3/3.5, but I love that fluff for Tieflings.

>>49479974
>That doesn't mean "let the players do whatever they want, that way they'll be happy.
Nobody said that, and no, it has nothing to do with 3.5. I've never played that or Pathfinder, so boogiemanning won't help you here.

>>49480755

>But if I invite you to play a game about Vikings settling a mysterious new continent, your lizardman ninja is not welcome.

What makes it so my lizardman cannot sail across the seas to settle in a mysterious new world though?

More to the point, why does your setting require racial restrictions to work?

>>49476222

Everything in Elder Scrolls is a type of elf.

>>49480866
We're not your DM, go cry to them about how tyrannical and cruel it is for a DM to ever restrict anything in any game they run.

File: photo11515.jpg (743KB, 1200x800px)

743KB, 1200x800px

>>49480970
DMs are people too man.

Usually autistic people. But they're people.

>>49480866
Sometimes restrictions contribute to fun.

Everything about a pen and paper RPG is just a series of rules to guide a conversation.

In that particular case, perhaps I want to insert you into something familiar (a band of mundane warriors and adventurers on a sea journey) and use that familiarity to accentuate the weirdness you'll encounter in this new world.

Imagine trying to run a horror game where the characters discover a tribe of ghouls preying on their small mountain town... and one of the players insists on playing a vampire.

>>49480970

Why even run a game with such a wide variety in races if you're just going to make everyone a generic human?

Why not run a system that already focuses on vikings and colonization in the first place rather than forcing the system to handle shit that's well above its pay grade.

>>49481236
Because it's pointless to make everyone learn a new niche system every time I want to run a game that isn't kitchen sink deeundee.

It's easy to straw man every argument against some horrible DM who just hates fun and wants to run a shitty LotR clone over and over again, but that's an unusual case. And I've never played in a full on kitchen sink game that was much good. Usually, any fun that might come from a menagerie of weirdness is drained of life by

So if I'm gonna run 5e, it's great that there's all those options in there, but as the GM I can do whatever I want with the system, and if it's really unenjoyable to someone, we can either find a compromise, or they can sit out the campaign.

>>49481636
*drained of all life by reducing all the weird creatures to cardboard cutouts that might as well be humans with a different statline

>>49481636
>>49481655

Niche campaigns require niche systems mate.

Deeandee is not designed for the campaign that you're planning and you're honestly doing a disservice to yourself and your players by forcing the "D&D can run anything" meme.

Besides, most systems nowadays are so simple that you can read about it and explain the rules in less than 10 minutes.

>>49481716
I never suggested D&D for everything. In fact my (totally hypothetical) concept of "normie adventurers discover weird continent" is narrower than a kitchen sink campaign that you seem to suggest--especially if it has to accomodate any weird combo the players come up with.

Trimming out Teiflings (or frogman paladins) does not substantially change the game.

Now, if we were talking about trying to run a gritty 20's gangster tale with D&D, I'd agree with you.

I don't suppose we'll come to any sort of understanding about this, but my basic point is that the game is not automatically ruined by mildly reducing the player's options at character creation.

File: 217.png (26KB, 300x100px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 300x100px

>>49481236
I'm probably just old school in the sense that I think the spellplague and 4e completely ruined Forgotten Realms. Tieflings existed before but they weren't their own race, and dragonborn... are just dumb. sorry.

Anyway, I know most people here probably hate the realms. /tg/ hates everything. Yes I realize the irony of posting that while also hating on dragonborn.

Also /tg/'s banner is incredibly appropriate atm.

>>49481881
>I think the spellplague and 4e completely ruined Forgotten Realms
>Forgotten Realms
>Ruined

Sorry, Sempai, but you can't ruin something that was already garbage.

File: 1473697281321.jpg (521KB, 700x1192px) Image search: [Google]

521KB, 700x1192px

>>49467604
my only problem with the dragon born was that 3 of my five players in my first campaign wanted to be one, so it was either say no to a core race, or make up an excuse why they were in the area.

I settled on them being mercenary guards for the dwarven caravans. worked out fairly well.

>>49481918
Well, I realized it was unpopular around these parts. So *Shrug* I guess.

But it is the default setting for dnd 5e sooo It is relevant to the discussion at least.

>>49482209

I wasn't arguing it's relevance, just the quality.

Also, IIRC, Dragonborn aren't native to Forgotten Realms and mainly end up there by accident.

Also, if we're going by the core rulebooks, it's more like the example setting, as the rulebooks doesn't delve into the fluff much at all and talk more about story/adventurer archetypes. I don't recall anything in them that really tie it to Forgotten Realms.

>>49482291
Nothing in 5e ties it to Forgotten Realms, it harshly avoids tying any of the rules to any specific setting or specific flavor.