[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.15644694 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

>"So, this is going to be a campaign that's a little more focused in its themes. Restrictions breed creativity, right?"
>"So the standard fantasy races, like elves and dwarves are present..."
>"But, because you're all going to be part of the same noble house, all of the PCs are going to have to be human..."
>cue several cries of "But I want to be a dwarf!" and "But I want to be an elf!" from players who never play humans at the table, who don't relent even after I raise my voice and explain the premise again

Ugh, god damn it all.

Anyone else have trouble convincing players to play a restricted race game? I couldn't imagine having to run for this group in a system where humans are the only race available.

>> No.15644706

I know what you mean. I'm trying to get players to run typical fantasy races, not unlike those you mentioned above, but they're all keen to play as some kind of half-celestial or tree person or devil. It really breaks the flow of a low magic setting when you have people like that walking around entirely human villages.

>> No.15644707

Slap your players.

Alternatively, see if they can all agree to play a single specific race. You're out for a single, unified family, right? No reason it can't come from another race.

Failing that, there's nothing that says that a human house can't employ non-human retainers. If I'm some local lord I'm going to get me a dwarf Master-At-Arms and an elven Court Wizard.

>> No.15644718

>You are all playing humans.
Sure. I'm short, stout, my main stats are STR and CON, I fight with 2hand axe. I like to drink, have a bit of temper issues. Oh and I have a beard. Any problems with that?

>> No.15644721

To clarify, the reasons for restricting races to human were twofold:

1. All part of the same noble house in a human dominated society.
2. Mild to moderate racism against anything that isn't human.

I explained 2 when I had to reiterate the premise, but they still persisted on dwarves and elves.

Even if I did allow for other races under the premise of "dwarf master-at-arms" or "elven court mage," I would have ended up with, like, only one human in the party.

>> No.15644724

I've never been in a game that restricted character choice in any way other than "Based on never having read the rules, I've decided that the Tome of Battle and Psionics are completely broken shit, stick to core".

That said, I would play a game like you're describine if I trusted the DM to be "let's do something specific so that the campaign world can really interact with your characters" guy instead of "you're all playing humans and you're all going to make the decisions I've already decided on" thatguy.

inb4 the generic piece of advice that applies to 90% of all RPG problems.

>> No.15644730

>"So, you want to play an unrestricted game, eh?"
>Players: "Of course. That's what 'roleplaying' is all about!"
>"Alright, but I'm letting you know: If I so much as see one scale, feather, or tuft of fur on your character, they will die in a most horrific fashion."

Player One rolls a human that eventually finds a sorceror to turn him into an Avian humanoid. He's brutally devoured in-flight with a Dragon that turns into the campaigns BBEG.

Player Two rolls a Lizardman. Unfortunately, I like Lizardmen. He rolls your stereotypical sex-crazed Lizardfolk. I hand him a Succubi that transforms into a horrible hag that proceeds to eviscerate him with several serrated claws, rending his insides outwards into an a horrible construct comprised of the passion the Succubi was born from: Art. His intesines were a picture frame, and his mutilated corpse the portrait, while all of his various fluids the canvas.

Player Three rolls a typical human who becomes a Lycanthrope. I had him brutally slaughtered by a witch hunting covenenant.

>> No.15644737

Then they get to be the boss. He's the bigwig who holds the purse strings, employs the others and calls the shots. He also gets to avoid being discriminated against.

I'm assuming that you didn't draw up a detailed setting before making the pitch to your players. What's the core of the game concept you're going for? Dynasty conflicts with political rivals while dealing with the perils of being rich and powerful in a fantasy setting? Stick with that, but let your players have some input into the exact form that concept takes.

>> No.15644753

One thing that I've noticed with the players in my groups is that they choose the class before they pick the race. So if they want to be a ranger they'll go with the Elf, if they want to be a cleric they go with the Dwarf, and the reason is because of the attribute bonuses the classes carry with them makes them the best they can be. Humans are unpopular, in D&D 4E anyway, because being able to choose a +2 bonus to one attribute is pointless when there is the right race that will give you the +2 to two.

So OP, your players are probably not bitching about not being able to pick the race that they want, but rather that their character is just that little bit less effective in combat.

>> No.15644764

If the majority of PCs are still human, why can't you just allow the Dwarf and/or Elf players to be retainers of the Noble House? It's quite clear playing the character they want to play, with the involved racial element, is important to them and maybe that means this all-Human party isn't going to pan out.

You should have discussed it with them earlier, I think.

>stereotypical sex-crazed Lizardfolk

>> No.15644767

I was in a campaign where the Royal Court was very much into humans being the superior race and all other races must be used as either slaves or magical components.

The player characters were supposed to be humans trying to decide whether they should fight for equal rights or defend their comfortable way of living. But no, this one guy wanted to be an elf.

So after much argument the DM let him. He made the elf make constant disguise checks while in town until he failed. The elf suddenly disappeared in the middle of the night, and we found his naked skinless body in the alleyway the next day.

We later found out that someone in town was making soft leather wares out of elf skin, and the paladin bought a set of gloves made from the player character's skin. Which was okay, since the law dictated that all other races from human were no better then animals.

>> No.15644770

I have weird ass players who spend too much time on /d/.

>> No.15644771

Are you kidding? I have the exact opposite problem with my players most of the time. I can't get them to break OUT of the archetypal fantasy races.

>> No.15644777

but surely a good noble house would have advisors from other races to advise on how their race would handle a situation, giving more options...

>> No.15644779

My group is really lenient with races. We've had a Goblin Druid, Half-Orc Luchador, Halfling Rogue, several Dwarfs and such. Our most consistent Human players are either unimaginative gits or gratuitous minmaxers.

>> No.15644780


OP, try going back to the group and seeing just how many would want to play humans. You might be able to get a decent mix of blooded human nobles and non-human retainers. You can even spin the latter as unusual and exceptional to play up the racism of the setting that you have in mind.

>> No.15644787

I'm not big on restrictions. If you want to add stuff that's cool, but saying "You have to play what I want you to play because I want you to play it" just seems a tad railroady.

>> No.15644789

>I'm assuming that you didn't draw up a detailed setting before making the pitch to your players.

Actually, I did. That's kind of my style.

>What's the core of the game concept you're going for? Dynasty conflicts with political rivals while dealing with the perils of being rich and powerful in a fantasy setting?

Exactly that.

>You should have discussed it with them earlier, I think.

Hindsight is 20/20.

It's 4e, but I allow humans to trade in their bonus trained skill and their +1 bonus to Fortitude/Reflex/Will for a second +2 ability score bonus.

That and Heroic Effort means that humans are a badass race.

>> No.15644795

>I've decided that the Tome of Battle and Psionics are completely broken shit,
>No Tome of Battle

Well fine then, I'm going to play a Wizard, optimize the fuck out of him and when we hit the later levels I'm going to fucking rape your campaign. Then we'll see what's broken shit.

>> No.15644815

>Actually, I did. That's kind of my style.
>Hindsight is 20/20.

It sure is. Go back to your group, talk about the themes you have in mind and see what they think. It might be that you have a deeper problem (they just want to adventure about). If not, then see about compromising. Don't flat out deny them non-human races, but try and sell them the setting. If it's not too big a problem you could even modify the start of the campaign.

Here's an idea; the PCs are hirelings of the noble house, the dirty dozen that they use to take care of problems. Any human characters among them may happen to be bastards of the house leader, of course, but they don't know that yet. That way you can start off with a setup that suits everyone and then, via assassinations, catastrophes and revelations, promote your players into more powerful roles within the house. Bastard child/children will get the official power, but they might see their non-human comrades as friends and allies and give them positions of power as well.

>> No.15644842

>It might be that you have a deeper problem (they just want to adventure about).

That's really what I'm worried about. I've been a player in the group up until now, when the old DM left, and pretty much all of his games literally started in a tavern and involved a ragtag bunch of adventurers accepting a quest, killing something, taking loot, and accepting a reward.

Nothing wrong with that, but I want something a little more... structured.

Thanks for the suggestions, I'll keep them in mind.

>> No.15644853

Communication is important. They may well be stuck in the default adventurer mindset and see the racial restrictions as totally arbitrary. Try and sell them the campaign concept but don't force it on them. All you'll end up with if you do that is a bunch of players shitting up what might have otherwise been an enjoyable game. People don't like it when they're forced into things.

Of course, the same goes for the GM. Don't bother running a campaign that you have no passion for. That definitely will lead to a shit game.

>> No.15644870

Suggestion: If you want pro-human thinking, racism and noble-house rivalries to be key themes within the game, wouldn't allowing non-humans allow you to better explore those themes?

>> No.15644888

Ding ding! That's the generic advice: talk to the fuckers. With the exception of that time that the guy got stabbed by his girlfriend because his PC was flirting with a female player's PC, it's always good advice.

>> No.15644943


You are a raging faggot.

>We want to play an unrestricted game!
>Hmmm... Alright
>*insert restrictions here*

Way to be a passive agressive jackass.

As for the OP... You might have had better luck if you had talked to them more before hand. I often DM games using the WoW RPG which happens to have alot of racism among the various races. I talk to my players about what kind of game they want to run, and what kind of races they would all like to play. Sometimes we play alliance campaigns, sometimes we play horde campaigns, or sometimes we go for neutral campaigns. And sometimes if someone is very persistent about playing something outside what is generally allowed, I might ask them to come up with a good reason as to why their character would work outside of their normal loyalties, along with informing them of the very likely racism they are probably going to run in to.

tl;dr Work with your players! I know I tend to be very weary when someone says "YOU MUST PLAY THIS RACE FOR MY SUPER SPECIAL CAMPAIGN!" You are playing D&D. The PCs are above average, and are able to break a few rules and be exceptions.

>> No.15645200


The way I see it, if you force players that hate humans and love dorfs and elves to play human characters that hate dorfs and elves, they're going to have difficulties and the roleplaying will be decent at best, horrific at worst. Your game may need some tinkering if you want to play it with this party.

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.