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

/vt/ is now archived.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 353 KB, 1280x1029, 1500339119645.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
55690162 No.55690162 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

You are the GM for a fantasy campaign. During character creation, one of your players has this to say about his character:

>So, I had a look at the campaign setting and none of the cultures or races you listed for player characters really appeal to me. I'd like to either play a character from some exotic, faraway culture you haven't mentioned who would be unique and stand out, or a monstrous character that would struggle to overcome the trials and adversity of living in your setting's society. If I can't have either of those, then I'm probably going to drop out of this campaign, since none of these other options interest me.

How do you react?

>> No.55690184

Ok, have a good day hopefully you find a game more to your liking

>> No.55690193

>If I can't have either of those, then I'm probably going to drop out of this campaign, since none of these other options interest me.

Okay then, maybe next time.

>> No.55690200

>"K. Bye, then."
If someone has to be exotic or monstrous and the center of attention to want to play, they're probably not worth having around. Just let them go without drama and get better players.

>> No.55690249


I don't see why not, unless there are some reasons why a monster-themed hero would be feel out of the campaign.

I'm no control-maniac faggot, settings are tools, not holy books.

>> No.55690259

Have him make a custom race to his liking, and shape it to the setting. Don't let him come up with something on his own or choose from some expanded source book or some shit. Also, don't give it any thing too special. Make sure it works with the party.

>> No.55690260

Well, it depends upon the context. If this is the first time he's playing the system, then I'd recommend just letting him go. If he doesn't have any/much experience with the system and isn't interested in building a character as-written, it may be he's just not interested in the system. Alternatively, if he's played too much of the system and is tired of the vanilla classes/races/etc, sitting down with him to think up something different wouldn't be a bad thing.

tl;dr itdepends.jpg

>> No.55690353


Okay, what did you have in mind? There's a Hobgoblin Empire a ways away that you could be from if the asian theme is your jam.

>> No.55690368

Tell them they can play a crabman.

>> No.55690395

>Thanks, but before I make my sheet I wanted to run a homebrew class that I saw that was pretty neat.

Give an inch. Take a mile.

>> No.55690400

Try to work with him to make a character exotic enough for him without being obnoxious or a snowflake.

>> No.55690437

Say no. Just because you are willing to negotiate doesn't mean you have to accept everything he requests. Negotiation implies that things might fall through, if that happens don't take it personally just say "I honestly don't think we can come up with a character concept that will satisfy us both. You can accept one of the options I mentioned as being acceptable but barring that I am going to say no, maybe next time."

>> No.55690452

>I'd like to either play a character from some exotic, faraway culture you haven't mentioned who would be unique and stand out, or a monstrous character that would struggle to overcome the trials and adversity of living in your setting's society.

Hey man, that's cool, I'll have to finagle some rules depending on what we land on, but how about we talk about it after today's session and then we can work you in next-

>If I can't have either of those, then I'm probably going to drop out of this campaign, since none of these other options interest me.

Oh, cool, seeya.

>> No.55690459

"Well, there's a reason there's the loose confederation of small nations banded together tucked into that corner, lot of weird things that got pushed out from elsewhere. It exists specifically to be a kitchen sink for weirder shit."

>> No.55690481

First posts best posts

>> No.55690504


>> No.55690518

>>Thanks, but before I make my sheet I wanted to run a homebrew class that I saw that was pretty neat.

I'm not sure I'm comfortable with an entire homebrew class. Maybe we could take the mechanics from a class in the core book and fluff it as this one you want to be?

>> No.55690544


Because we're better than you, mostly.

Seriously, going mad for a request like this? What the fuck?


Homebrew is a whole another beast. Of course a sane individual would state -if the game in question has lot of homebrew- his stance on that before the game. You do that, right anon?

>> No.55690570

>If he's not a friend
Sorry to hear that mate, hope you have better luck with your next game.

>If he's a friend
I guess I could take a look at coming up with something else. Any preferences?

>> No.55690584

>"I asked for your input when creating the setting, same as with everyone else. The race of catfolk are entirely your doing. If you wanted something different involved, you could have mentioned it sometime in the last few weeks."

>> No.55690653
File: 1002 KB, 1278x1030, Pls no bully.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


Why would you say something so mean anon-chan? I'm just a cute 1,000 year old dragon girl who thinks you are baiting just as hard as I did so we should be friends

>> No.55690664
File: 218 KB, 340x324, 1452472760397.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Eh. I've done it before.

I'll just mention that he'll have to run it by me for approval first, and I have the authority to retroactively make balance changes to the homebrew if it brings up any problems.

>> No.55690693

So long as you expect to be screamed at, hunted, and generally shat on and fucked with for no reason. If you are ok with that and won't bitch when it happens then go ahead.

>> No.55691036

Is that a minotaur_(male)?

>> No.55691170

Yeah, I don't think this is the group for you. Thanks for stopping by, best of luck in finding a game more to your liking.

The request is fine, it's the attitude that's the problem.

>> No.55691179

I ask him what he wants to play, and if it isn't too overpowered and doesn't clash with the tone I'm going for, I'll allow it. Adventurers aren't ordinary people, it's okay to have one of an unusual race.

>> No.55691180

I have exotic and monstrous races available, so they wouldn't really have an argument.

>> No.55691231

I let them make the character they want. Monstrous or exotic PCs are only really an issue with shitty players that refuse all the downsides that comes with the character. They want to play a minotaur because it's cool or a kitsune because they're sexy, but they start bitching when their choice of race effects them negatively like being hated or stigmatized because they're a fucking monster. A player explicitly excited to explore those difficulties is always welcome at my table.

>> No.55691241

>running gurps

Sure, just take the race advantages out of your starting points, and give me time to veto before our first session.

>> No.55691377


No anon, I'm not baiting. Only retards that shouldn't be playing don't consider simple facts like these.

>> No.55691399

pure shit GM incoming
>So, I had a look at the campaign setting
i don't have one we play offline diablo where we do the math with dice instead of clicking on the monsters

>I'd like to either play a character from some exotic, faraway culture. or a monstrous character
what the fuck ever, you'll just get stuck in with the boys and clear out dungeons and ruined churches, monster PCs welcome as long as the relative power level's around the same

Now, you and the rest of the party, with whom you've travelled for a month and got to know them, find yourselves in front of a village, flames rising from the hovels and corpses of the hapless victims strewn about. A few shadows of what seem to be children disappear into the carnage. Seems you were spotted, what do you do?

>> No.55691410

My GM actually went along with that. Was a good campaign.

Sure, it was the GURPS Banestorm setting, so that made things easier, but still.

>> No.55691430

Pitch me your character concept for either in a sentence and we'll go from there.

>> No.55691445
File: 162 KB, 800x800, jonah sketch.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I'm doing that now and it feels great.

>> No.55691491

If you can't vet the power or efficacy of homebrew presented to you, you don't deserve the DM hat. If you let a player run game on you by not vetting the homebrew before they used it, that's on you.

The GM should know the game as well as, if not better than, the players. They're the ones running it.

>> No.55691504

I'm actually ok with players contributing to the setting, but I'd really have to see where they were wanting to take this before I would give it an ok. I have to make sure they aren't using this as an excuse to cheese the system or play a fun draining sad sack.

>> No.55691674

>you don't deserve the DM hat
Oh fuck off.

This is why we have next to no GMs in the hobby. GMing is not a right you earn. It's something that should be encouraged. It's a skill that has to be learned and improved upon. Nobody starts off GMing perfectly.

>> No.55691737

>Shitposter-kun proceeds to cry in a GM gripes thread about how he's the only one who ever GMs in his area

>> No.55692150

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

>> No.55692177


No, it's because people are faggos that can't see if a homebrew is shit. And so veto it.

This should be required for GMs, or the game will be a gigantic failure, but anyone could do that (and should).

>> No.55692178

This thread has gone to heck in a handbasket

>> No.55692211

>How do you react?
Sure, tend to fluff things out as we go along to tell the truth, see no reason why I can't slip something else in, have anything in particular in mind?

>>Thanks, but before I make my sheet I wanted to run a homebrew class that I saw that was pretty neat.
Mind if I take a look?
>Depending on the class
Been a few homebrewn classes I've wanted to play myself over the years but gotta make sure things are balanced, let you play the first couple of levels as is but I may tweak the features or your XP growth if you start looking under or over powered


Y'know we could just refluff X and change a few traits around if that's what you want? Just saying it looks very similar, Yes/No? Alright

Also this anon >>55690664 has it right, no reason you can't let him play it, just let him know you may tweak things to keep things balanced compared to the rest of the party.
You don't even need to modify the mechanics if it isn't too bad, tweaking XP granted to each PC is actually a pretty good way to keep the party equal in power if they have different tier classes, hell I've let PCs play a gestalt in nongestalt games in return for slower level progression and it worked out fine

>> No.55692256

All homebrew is shit. That's common sense. Only morons think what they cooked up in five minutes is better than what professionals who get paid can do.

>> No.55692298

>cooked up in five minutes
This right here tells me you've done no homebrewing

>> No.55692385

Well then I guess it comes down to how much I like them and how much of a pain in the ass they are going to be during play.

>> No.55692437

>I am a master game designer, my senses of balance honed through decades of exposure to the ins and outs of the art of the table top rpg. You dare make light of my work, nay, my passion?! I'll have you know I spend hours perfecting my homebrews, and all of my players agree that what I write is far superior to first party material. Why the only reason my work isn't already formally published is because I refuse to pander to the nu-male libcucks who have infested this once great hobby. I suggest you think before you run your mouth next time, child.

>> No.55692438

god, that picture is just adorable.

>> No.55692466
File: 34 KB, 320x254, max.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Y-S is best

>> No.55692469

I don't want to save it cause I don't want people to think I'm a pedo.

>> No.55692490

Write him up a unique race of snowflake elementals.

>> No.55692498

Nice rant anon, just saying making 5 level Prc takes at least 10 minutes

>> No.55692538


>> No.55692571

>Monstrous character
I'll let you play as a mutant or freak that's an outcast from a regular culture or race. Choose up to three deformities or I'll make a table for your to roll for randomized deformities. If you get drawback deformities I'll let you get some free points to spend elsewhere. Your backstory should probably involve a circus or freak show of some kind.

>> No.55692637

"As long as you're willing to work with me in developing it."

>> No.55692643

I ask what they had in mind

If it clashes too hard with the intended tone, or I suspect they're just doing it to be a special snowflake, I shut it down hard and tell them that the game is probably not for them.

If they're being reasonable about it and just want to play a character Stranger in a Strange Land style, then I tentatively okay it, but I'll need to give it a few sessions to see how it goes before I'm fully on board.

>> No.55692654

I tell the player to take his homebrew class and shove it real far up his colon.

>> No.55692679

I have a brother who is like this literally every game i run. I tell him the same thing every time.

Whatever bullshit special race/culture doesn't fucking exist in this world. Something in the books exists to make it option but its only an option, not a requirement for me to include in my world that i design.

>> No.55692685

This desu

If a player threatens to drop out before even getting an answer to his original query or discussing his issue in more detail, then he's 100% going to pull that card again before the game is done.

I've literally dealt with this shit before. They don't even realise they're being coercive, half the time, but especially in the case of somebody like me who spent years of therapy getting over a desperate need to please everyone that was basically killing me by inches, it's a pretty horrible exchange to have.

>> No.55692699

If I can't play a kobold then the game is unplayable and the dm doesn't know how to run good games enjoy your shit session scrubs.

>> No.55692701

No kidding

>> No.55692733

>DM puts forth all the effort into making a cohesive setting
>Player shits all over it because he wants to be a special snowflake
What the fuck is with /tg/ and entitled players?

>> No.55692806


This is why I tend to give people at least a week to do a think and hash it out with me and the rest of the group. My response to this will vary depending on how close to game night this conversation is being had, and to what extent group dynamics (in and out of character) being considered or disregarded. Goes double if the setting is being well received and everyone else is on board.

If he's showing up to game night totally unprepared, and we're talking about this long after everyone else is ready to go, then he doesn't have the option of playing: he can choose to leave or I can eject him - but him leaving is how it's going down.

Now, if I sent out the setting info on Sunday, and he's getting back to me in an email on Tuesday then chances are we can come up with something. A fish out of water foreign character might be just the thing to highlight certain aspects of the setting by way of contrast. I make it clear that the setting comes first, and that the character will be expected to integrate or be chased back to where it came from. I also make it clear that weapons from the character's homeland will confer zero mechanical advantages.

>> No.55692817

Dude, one glance at companies like Paizo proves that having a title and a paycheck doesn't mean shit. Some of the most amateurish slop I've even seen was in official rulebooks and modules. If you take everything that has an official seal of approval as gospel truth and reject all homebrews as substandard deviancies, then you're doing yourself a huge disservice. Check everything, regardless of source, and only let through what passes muster.

>> No.55692864
File: 337 KB, 606x681, sairiaoh.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>tfw you are running a lower power campaign
>that guy comes with an exotic race with an exotic class that needs niche circumstances in order for their class to excel at one over the top stupid thing then wonders why their class is effectively a shitty fighter all game when the setting has no access to astral bullshit magic

>> No.55692888

>We had this talk already Jared, you can't play an Inugami no Samurai, I don't care if you already typed up 10 pages of backstory and stats, we made it clear you can use it in the Five Rings game. Not this one. Drop it.

>> No.55693268

Yeah, just because you're getting paid and have experience doesn't mean it'll be good.

So how much of a moron do you have to be to think you're capable of doing better than the garbage spewed out by people who have both?

>> No.55693278

If they'd looked at my setting, they would have seen that it has both of those already available to players.

So, since they're liars and can't be assed to look before asking, they get politely ejected from the group.

>> No.55693363

When did the gender (gender) thing get so widespread? Why not just say trap?

>> No.55693439

How long have I known this player? Do they try to pull this shit every game? Having an outsider type character can be fun if the person can handle it and they don't just want to do it to be a special snowflake. If his reasoning is solid and I think he is up to the task then I would probably let him do it.

>> No.55693449

It's a meme. It'll run out of steam when it stops being funny or relevant. My guess is that we'll see the last of it before 2019.

>> No.55693456
File: 1.63 MB, 360x270, A Good Laugh.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Wow, anon, you previous-leveled yourself. Good work.

>> No.55693468

None of my players would do that.
And if they did I'd give them the option if they for some reason already didn't have it because they'd be less of a fag about asking for it and I'm not a mean GM.
Just don't play with bitches.

>> No.55693507

Depends - are they a special snowflake egocentric faggot - then I guess they're dropping out of the campaign.

If they value roleplaying and just want something like that to play as something different - I'm sure we can work something out.

>> No.55693861
File: 88 KB, 640x480, 0316001648.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I actually have the exact opposite problem. I asked to join a game with someone I hardly know, and his policy for his world is no dwarves, elves, orcs or any of the more standard races because "it's all been done before". He wants everyone to focus more on more unique species like satyrs and bullywogs and whatnot. I get what he's going for, but I feel like by doing this, he's being more restrictive than creative.

>> No.55693879

On a sidenote, I'll still probably play as a centaur or bird person.

>> No.55693895

A lot of autists think presenting an ultimatum is being diplomatic

>> No.55693904

I'd wish them the best and assume they will be back the next day asking to play regardless.

>> No.55693938

I mean, if you're leaving no room for your pcs to influence the world during character creation then maybe you should go write a novel instead.

I'm not saying you should bend over backwards to accommodate literally everything, but if everyone is specifically limited to only the very basest of concepts within the space you define for them then it comes off as you being more interested in telling a story than GMing an RPG.

>> No.55693965

I was okay with it until that last sentence.
Honestly, I love it when players try to add to the setting, but the way that last sentence was worded stirs something angry within me.

>> No.55694056

>So, I had a look at the campaign setting and none of the cultures or races you listed for player characters really appeal to me. I'd like to either play a character from some exotic, faraway culture you haven't mentioned who would be unique and stand out, or a monstrous character that would struggle to overcome the trials and adversity of living in your setting's society.
Definitely worth talking to them to try and figure out what they're actually after. So long as they're a decent person we can probably figure something out or reach some kind of compromise.
Even at face value there's nothing inherently wrong with either of those ideas: they still give space for interesting characters, even if they are cliché and overused.

>If I can't have either of those, then I'm probably going to drop out of this campaign, since none of these other options interest me.

>> No.55694065

It turns a nuanced situation with room for negotiation into a binary ultimatum where it's their way or the highway.

>> No.55694076
File: 651 KB, 720x540, cbbb01ba5005cf4e124dea5cb06ef291.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>You want to be a beast race? Ok heres Volos Guide to Monsters. Pick a beast race from within. If you dont see anything here that interests you then my game probably isnt for you.

>> No.55694276

And a very limp, ineffectual ultimatum at that "give me thing or I'll go away and stop crying for thing" is a damn easy choice for most people

>> No.55695717

I don't know, the effectiveness of it is dictated by the size of the local tabletop scene. If you can't reliably get another player, one of your existing players dropping out could have a big impact on the viability of a campaign.

>> No.55695820

>implying players aren't a dime a dozen

>> No.55695870

>imblyign players aren't a diamond dozen

>> No.55695926

Where do you live where tabletop players are that easy to find?

>> No.55695940

Depends on the setting I'm running and how good a player he is.

If I don't know the player, it's a massive red flag.

>> No.55695980

Any major city.

>> No.55696021


>> No.55696199

I'd be inclined to tell them to fuck off after they give me an ultimatum because fuck ultimatums. But otherwise it would depend on how well I know the player, and what kind of campaign we're doing

>> No.55696287

>Of course a sane individual would state -if the game in question has lot of homebrew- his stance on that before the game.
No, not really. If it's not mentioned beforehand, you should assume that homebrew is not allowed by default(though the GM may make an exception if there's something you really want and you ask nicely). This isn't rocket science. How much homebrew the system has available is wholly irrelevant.

>> No.55696446

Just run it with one less person, worst case staple a skill monkey or heal bot to the party to round it out.

>> No.55696594

My work would be considerably better since I'd put in the time and effort to think it through and take into consideration all factors, instead of just cashing out an easy check and pandering to the lowest common denominator. That's what separates enthusiasts from corporate drones.

>> No.55696653

>Why can't you see that my paper airplane is better than any aircraft an engineer could design? They're just corporate drones! I put real effort and dedication into my paper airplanes!

>> No.55696681

Equating a soulless corporate drone doing the bare minimum to get paid to an aircraft engineer is absurd.

>> No.55696708
File: 160 KB, 715x755, 1486072364134.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>he actually thinks the people who design games are soulless corporate drones who do the bare minimum for a paycheck

>> No.55697492

The original source is a terribly translated hentai doujin and the particular panel isn't work safe enough to posting a blue board, but it's quite hilarious in context.

Go ask /d/ for the source

>> No.55697514

Aircraft engineer here, we are soulless corporate drones because the pay is shit for the work involved, and usually boring as fuck

>> No.55697844

My ability to say no to stupid shit doesn't magically disappear.

>> No.55698205

I think everyone knows the source by now, people are just asking why it's so widespread that everyone goes with 'xyz (male)' rather than the simpler 'trap.'

>> No.55698290

Would never happen because I already prepared myself for that, so my campaign has exotic culutres and allows monster characters with varying degrees of aceptation

The catch?
Every pc is an exalted and thus already a super duper special snowflake no matter the race or origin of the character.

>> No.55698506

Why during creation, why not during play? Why is it out of the question to expect people to work with what they are given, and THEN let the story play out the way it does once the characters are out in the world.

>> No.55698640

Let them play the race, but have the majority of the NPCs treat them like shit.

>> No.55698690


This isnt a problem. I always have a largely unelaborated on continent across the ocean specifically so that I have room to plop down cultures and civilizations players want to use but I didnt put on the map we will be using for the game.

Get on my level, OP.

>> No.55698717

Depends on the specifics of what he wants to play and the campaign itself, but stating that you're going to drop the game if you don't get what you want isn't doing you any favors.

>> No.55698734

I would play a Hobgoblin weeabu...

>> No.55698744


>> No.55698952

If the player has sound suggestions for what he wants to play instead, and I feel it is within the realm of reason to make fit it, sure I'll allow it. But I'm not going to come up with something for the player if they're just bitching about the "lack of interesting options".
It also would depend on the type of game I'd run. If it was a game with randoms, I would ask if this is really the game they want to join, since there are no interesting options for them. The far more likely, a game with friends, I would probably try to compromise so that said person doesn't have to sit out.

>> No.55699023

Well, good news! You can play a Not!Italian who everyone thinks are a massive joke, a Not!Mongolian who everyone hates, or a Not!Arab who everyone is convinced has sex with monsters.

So what'll it be? Skooma Addicted Italians, Poverty Stricken Mongolians, or Bestiality Prone Arabs?

Or you can play a Not!Russian, like everyone else.

>But I wanna be from Not!Korea/Japan
Their God-Emperor has a pretty strict "Leave and Die" policy. Outside of the rarity of the people who survive, you'll probably be killed for looking strange in Not!Russian Siberia.

>> No.55699029
File: 4 KB, 225x225, thinken.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

If you can't make an interesting character whose defining trait isn't his race, then what the fuck are you doing in a roleplay hobby?

If it's more about culture, then:
>a character from some exotic, faraway culture
Okay, fine, but prepare to get the "fish out of water" and "a stranger in a strange land" treatment, rather than being "unique and stand out".
You don't magically become a spotlight-hogging star merely by being from another culture.

>a monstrous character that would struggle to overcome the trials and adversity of living in your setting's society
So, either a sociopath, or a cripple. Yeah, I'm fine with that.

>> No.55699125
File: 235 KB, 1280x1135, mon girl by greenteaneko.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I don't think it's even particularly nsfw

>> No.55699221

most of my "can I play this race instead?" Bullshit is centered around wanting to play things I find thematically fun. A hobgoblin that respects the rules of the society or group he is in, but also knows what he would do in the situation and grumbles about it. Or the skeleton of a former alcoholic who can't really enjoy alcohol anymore and it bothers him. Is this shitty to do or would you consider it fine?

>> No.55699560

Why do they need to retcon whole sections of the setting just to play the game in the first place? I don't ask to play Saitama in a Call of Cthulhu campaign and neither should you.

>> No.55699667

>Is this shitty to do?
Yes. None of those characters are interesting and the joke would wear thin after two sessions.

>> No.55699769


I dont have time to help make another aspect of the world for one player.

Now if he came with some existing ideas and whatnot it would depend on how solid they are and how well they fit into the campaign

>> No.55699855
File: 2.15 MB, 498x207, tenor (1).gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Ending with an ultimatum

>> No.55701682


bye felicia

>> No.55703674

Why not both? Why is it out of the question to let your players pitch ideas to you about the world that they want their character to be related to? Your world isn't more important than your players having fun.

>> No.55703755

Who said anything about retconning entire sections of a setting? Obviously you, as the GM, consider their suggestions and decide whether or not they are workable in the setting. Clearly you say no to Saitama in Call of Cthulhu. But why is it a big deal if someone says they want to be a cleric of a god that they made up instead of you?

>> No.55703837

>blah blah blah blah blah If I can't have either of those, then I'm probably going to drop out of this campaign
Fuck outta here, NO ONE gives ultimatums to the GM. If there is anything that will make me cut a player immediately, it's people who think I will allow them to leverage power over me when I run a game.

>> No.55703838

>Have him play a Mogli and be done with it.
>''B-but. It's just a human raised by wolves!''
>''Yes and? Do you expect me to pander to you? Take it or leave it!''
>''F-fine.'' *after a few junglebook refferences it gets boring and he decides to make a proper character*

>> No.55703889

That's sillier and more special snowflake than anything presented in the OP.

And if you think the sort of player that would give that kind of ultimatum wouldn't have a field day with "raised by wolves" and use it to derail the game every five minutes, then you must be new at this.

Be prepared for them to pee on people to "mark their territory"or act like a wild animal who doesn't understand what cups and forks are for when the party is trying to impress the local ruler, and so on and so forth.

You fucked yourself, bud.

>> No.55704781

>Who said anything about retconning entire sections of a setting?
>why is it a big deal if someone says they want to be a cleric of a god that they made up instead of you?
If the GM sat down and constructed a cohesive setting where every piece has a purpose and leads to a slew of potential plothooks for the players to encounter and explore, it means that they sat down and considered enough about the setting to know what is or is not possible within their world.

When you walk up to the GM and ask "hey, can I add a god I made up to the setting?" you're basically asking the GM if they don't mind retconning large swathes of the game to accommodate your deity, because in order to add a deity to the setting, you have to consider who worshipped this god, how they worshipped the god, what the god stood for, whether or not another group of followers would have an issue with the god and their followers, etc.

If you agree to play in someone's setting, play in the setting as is.

>> No.55705048
File: 117 KB, 255x220, around blacks.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>If I can't have either of those, then I'm probably going to drop out of this campaign, since none of these other options interest me.

This line invalidates everything before it. Unless its someone I really know well ANY attempt at "well if thats how it is i guess i'll just leave" is met with "ok, bye." because that is the only appropriate response. D&D is a trust based game, in which players and the GM cooperate to have a fun time. If someone is willing to flat out leave because they didn't get their way then they should.

Caving to something like that once is going to make it happen again. Worse is if other players 'learn' from that example and want other special favors because anon got one and if anon said he would leave and got his way then I should too.. Unless you are saying anon matters more than me? You're not saying that are you?

>> No.55705317

If you're unable to adapt reasonable things your players want to your setting then maybe you really should just go write a book. RPGs are collaborative storytelling, with crunch thrown in to make it a game.

Continuing on this god thing, say your player wants to play a cleric of the god whose aspects include the cycle of life (birth, death, rebirth, whatever), staple that onto your god of death as either the major way they are worshipped for laypeople or make the cycle aspect some fringe cult that laypeople don't bother distinguishing from the crazy death servants.

You can tailor the concessions you give to your players to fit things you have in mind, you just need to use a little imagination.

>> No.55705421

The person isn't holding a gun to your head, they are saying that for your prospective game that you two would play together they don't think they'll be interested if they are forced to not have one of those two roles.
Like the answer is easy, if you think either of those would fit the campaign then sure, if you don't then say sorry I guess it didn't work out.

>> No.55705476

By adding that statement at the end, they are purposefully trying to pressurize the GM into giving them what they want. It's an unpleasant form of coercion that lots of people don't want to deal with when they're trying to game and unwind. We get enough of that from our employers, our parents and our SOs.

>> No.55705566

>If you're unable to adapt reasonable things your players want to your setting then maybe you really should just go write a book.
The absolute balls on you, going on about "well who said anything about retconning whole sections of a setting" and then going on about "YOU SHOULD ADAPT, YOU'RE JUST WRITING A NOVEL REEEEEEEE!"

My setting doesn't have a god of the cycles of life, will never have anything similar to that concept for the foreseeable future, and the reason being is because I already have deities covering life and death, birth/rebirth is already covered by the life, and the death deity already has followers who are seen as cultists even though he's actually a decent god who views himself as a janitor, mostly.

If you cannot accept it and cannot look past your own nose to participate in the setting, then you'd be doing us both a favor if you packed up shit and left, because it's clear that you're only interested in yourself more than the game.

>> No.55705754

>Why're you such a goddamned disappointment?

>> No.55705765
File: 8 KB, 200x200, 1474141593943.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I just barely showed you all the monstrous and exotic races, you mong.

>> No.55706002

I'd let them go for it, but warn him that his character will suffer penalties in roll playing and possibly even combat, depending on how outrageous his final build is.

>> No.55706016


Well participation's voluntary so bye.

Protip, snowflakes are never worth it, 9/10 (I'm generous) times it's a gimmick and nothing more, half of the other times it's an attempt to powergame, and I'm not wading through that shit for the off chance of someone doing it justice.

>> No.55706186

To me it's about the wording. If they said "I don't trust myself to keep interest in the game unless I can have one of these options, so I'll just step out of the game if you don't think it'll fit in your campaign." I'm much more forgiving and don't see it as coercive.

The way the OP puts it feels like an ultimatum thrown in to put pressure on the GM to get their own way.

>> No.55707446

I'd probably be appreciative of him letting me know that he might leave ahead of time, so I can go ahead and ask other people if they'd want to join. I would say that a monstrous character would be easier to drop into the setting than crafting a whole new culture, so focus on that. He could pitch a few ideas and, if I don't think any of them would work, I'd tell him so and that he might have better luck with a different game.

There's no reason to be an asshole on either side. So long as he's sincere and genuinely accepts a 'no' if I decide one, then all is well.

>> No.55707634
File: 84 KB, 309x473, Character_Death.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>How do you react?
That could be interesting Anon. Being from an exotic culture, while a neat idea, is not something I have prepared for and would end-up causing your PC to be shoehorned in and neither of us wants that. Let's work from the monstrous angle. What kind of monster is your PC? A creature that is usually seen as a savage beast, a normal person transformed into a horrific form, etc.?

In most of my settings these kinds of requests would be acceptable though with the "faraway and unmentioned land" situation I would tell them it is not going to happen unless they give me some time to develop something on my own or they and I work together to make said land. If they can't accept this and keep pestering me I will tell them to piss off.

>> No.55707716


"Alright, let's work this out! I have some 'Faraway Lands' books for the game, maybe we can find something in there that fits?"

I am always open to discuss ideas and characters, but if the player wants to be unique for dumb reasons, I will try to steer him or her in the direction where it won't disrupt the game. If it is not a dumb reason, and the options have genuinly no appeal to him or her, then I don't mind working something else out.

Fuck, at that point, I'm happy the player took the time to read the campaign setting. 4/5 m,y players don't even bother reading.

>> No.55707760

Well then that's something you reject you fucking autist, jesus christ. I never said you had to accept everything players wanted. In the first post you responded to I specifically said not to bend over backwards for them. I was simply giving an example. Your setting is not perfect, no matter how much you want to pretend it is, and I can guarantee your players will find it more fun and engaging to be allowed more freedom in determining their characters' origins.

>> No.55710821

>I never said you had to accept everything players wanted.
No, you just implied that if I didn't accept everything the players wanted then I might as well be writing a novel and that my players will enjoy my campaign less if I don't entertain their stupid ideas. Major difference
>I can guarantee your players will find it more fun and engaging to be allowed more freedom in determining their characters' origins.
They can certainly decide their character's origins, but only if it doesn't conflict with something that was already established within the setting. Maybe, after I know that you can handle it, will I entertain the thought of you adding something to my setting to fit a character concept, but if you demand shit from me, no matter how small, the concept's flying out the window, and you'll be asked to leave.

It may seem "autistic" to you but if I'm presenting you with a setting, the least you can do is make a character that fits within that setting.

>> No.55711116

>Get to play all my favourite furry magical realm bullshit AND get a get-out-of-jail-free excuse just handed to me by the DM himself
Man I'd sign up quicksmart

>> No.55711198

>So, I had a look at the campaign setting and none of the cultures or races you listed for player characters really appeal to me.
The empire spans five continents. If you can't find a culture that isn't represented, I don't know what I can do for you.
>I'd like to either play a character from some exotic, faraway culture you haven't mentioned who would be unique and stand out,
Thrill me. Maybe we can make something work.
>or a monstrous character that would struggle to overcome the trials and adversity of living in your setting's society.
You're campaigning across lands owned by a "humanity-only" theocracy. You can try a monstrous character, but be prepared to be player-killed fifteen seconds after "hello, can I join your party?"
>If I can't have either of those, then I'm probably going to drop out of this campaign, since none of these other options interest me.
Ok, have a good day hopefully you find a game more to your liking
>Thanks, but before I make my sheet I wanted to run a homebrew class that I saw that was pretty neat.
I understand the appeal of running a custom class. I have several custom classes that have been extensively playtested by several DMs. Give me the notes and stats on your class and I'll playtest it with some of my buddies. If it's unbalanced then it'll probably be a no-go.

>> No.55711217

>Maybe, after I know that you can handle it, will I entertain the thought of you adding something to my setting
Holy shit. Did it never occur to you how wildly arrogant you sound? You're playing a game of pretend, get your head out of your ass.

>> No.55711227

I have two things.
First, almost all of my games have room for "The Faller". Someone from a world they can't remember stuck in a world they don't understand.
Second, I usually have a few, intentionally ill-defined populations designed to be filled in later, either for rolling new characters, or later freeform and filler sessions. As long as you are okay with your culture of hippy dwarves, WoW gnomes, or whatever being a very minor player in the scheme of things, then that's an option.
As a rule and an exception, I do not have gurorius nihon as an option and shoot it down if requested, unless they sell me something interesting.

If those won't satisfy, then no dice.

>> No.55711239

Hahaha the second something is off limits everyone swarms to be one. Players are like fucking children sometimes.

>> No.55711370

It only sounds arrogant to you because you're so used to GM's being willing to alter their shit on a whim to make sure that every stupid ass concept you have fits within their setting.

When someone sits down and comes up with an actual setting, and they actually figure out how shit works, the least you can do is create a character that fits within that setting. If something within the setting doesn't exist, the correct answer is to say "okay then, I'll think of something else." or "okay then, so what's the closest I can get to the original concept?" because not every fucking setting is supposed to encompass everything under the fucking sun.

If I'm arrogant for telling you that I'll only consider adding shit when I can trust you, then I can safely say that you're the type of snowflake that required the caveat in the first place.

>> No.55711378

Children at least have an excuse for why they're the way they are, these are grown ass man(children) throwing a hissy fit because you didn't let them play as an elf in a setting where elves are hunted to extinction.

>> No.55711412

Nah man, there's ways to say "no" that don't involve sounding like an arrogant cunt.

That guy's right, you sound arrogant as fuck.

>> No.55711427

Nah, you're just a limp-wristed faggot. You can't even come out and say that you're upset or anything, no, you have to samefag and pretend to be someone else because you can't even confront someone whose separated by a computer screen.

You big fucking baby!

>> No.55711439

Not samefagging, bro.

Must be some special kind of insecure to assume everyone who disagrees with you is the same person.

>> No.55711476


>> No.55711504

No, I'm just hesitant to assume that there's two faggots ITT who apparently have skin so thin that I could wipe my ass with your forearm.

Also, the irony of calling other people insecure when the entire argument was caused because you weren't allowed to add some OC donut steel garbage to my setting.

>> No.55711517

I agree with you and I even I think it's time for you to stop posting.

>> No.55711541

No, you leave.

>> No.55711549

>My setting doesn't have a god of the cycles of life, will never have anything similar to that concept for the foreseeable future, and the reason being is because I already have deities covering life and death, birth/rebirth is already covered by the life, and the death deity already has followers who are seen as cultists
See, from a GM perspective I think that's backwards. You just have the "god of cycles of life" being both those gods of life and death having a betting contest and the resulting confusion ending worshipped as the concept of "cycles of life" as being answered by either life god or death god.

Then that just simply ties into the setting easily.

>> No.55711562
File: 75 KB, 331x221, Small116Leave_867855922[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


I've already made the stupid mistake of bastardising a game setting in order to get one friend to try playing. It's not happening again.

>> No.55711592

An argument that you responded to because you were so offended at the mere thought of someone else having a degree of control over your game of make-believe. This street goes both ways.

>> No.55711616

Man, I'm the guy you accused of samefagging.

I don't think players should get to add whatever they want to shit up a setting. I don't disagree with the point you were making.

But you were, in fact, being an arrogant dickwad about it. As I said, you can say 'no' without being a colossal douchbag.

This is a social hobby. Rampant asshattery is not the path to success here. A GM needs to have some motherfucking tact, bro.

>> No.55711828

>How to be awful GM unable to handle anything at all: The Post
There is nothing worse than dismissing GM. Nothing. Unless you can explain to people why you don't allow this or that, you are That GM.

>> No.55711836

>If someone X, they're probably not worth having around
How do you know that, exactly?

>> No.55711844

The first sentence in the comment is
>So, I had a look at the campaign setting
so the GM already had a setting made up with reasons why the races are what they are in it.

So your complaint is invalid, really.

>> No.55711862

Because they delivered an ultimatum before they even heard the GM's reasoning for why they can't be a special snowflake? That's pretty much being a dick right out of the box,, and playing with a dickhead who tries to give the GM an ultimatum without reasonable discourse is someone you don't want in a cooperative game.

>> No.55711903

>>Person who legitimately does 99% of all the work in a game has a single expectation, before the game has started.
Seriously, consider suicide.

>> No.55711971
File: 173 KB, 623x414, 1497734116621.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I'd have stopped them halfway through the second sentence.

>> No.55712139

My setting has a chunk occupied by two exotic cultures (they're a ruling minority in the territory they hold, no longer supported by their homeland, and losing ground... Easily displaced into any part of the setting). Also two of my core races are goblins (mercenaries on most sides of most conflicts, spies or squatters in peace time) and trolls (solitary cannibals... Basically sentient bears).

>> No.55712692

Sounds like someone trying to hold the game hostage to get what they want.

Last person who did this to my group was told to fuck off

>> No.55712725

Unless a reason is stated, it's lack of reason. Saying "No, you can't do that" and "No, you can't do that, because X" are two completely different stories

... what?
The player outright states "I'm not interested in given choice" and you start rambling some shit about special snowflakes and being dick, also not explaining how the hell the two connect.
As far as the story goes:
1) GM presented players a choice
2) Player A is not interested of choice and asks for additional options
The fuck, man?
By your logic, player group is taken hostage by their GM each time new scenario or campaign starts and aren't allowed to say a single word against it. Hell, to make your fallacy more transparent:
If the GM declares "We are going to play an elf-only setting", then the player asking "But why? I don't want to play as an elf" is a dickhead as far as your logic goes.

>> No.55712732

I'm genuinely sorry if the division of workload in your group is 99:1.
Consider changing players.
And learning some grammar

>> No.55712778

Last time I've checked, tabletop RPG was about people having fun while playing and running them. If either side is not happy with the way how the game goes, something went wrong on the other side of the table than the unhappy person is sitting.

Said that, I really don't see the problem presented in this thread, not to mention the childish "boot them now!" reactions. This guy got it right >>55690259 while everyone started passive-aggressive bullshit that breeds nothing but boredom and lack of interest in the hobby for the entire group in the end, since drama overtakes the game.

>> No.55712831

sadly, this is why tg isnt all that interesting

>> No.55712875

In my last group I had similar issue. GM asked us in advance to prepare character ideas, one of the guys said he wants to play a shapeshifter (at this point it wasn't stated if the setting is with or without magic, turned out it was no-magic). The GM allowed it after some consideration, but guided all the limits and choices possible. In the end everyone was happy - the GM still had his scenario intact, the player had the character he wanted and we as a party gained a great scout, since the PC could turn into a sparrowhawk.

But unlike "get out!", that took effort from the GM, so go figure why people are more willing to throw players out.

>> No.55713457

>This street goes both ways.
Only if you don't know how to drive.

>> No.55713468

Bye bye!

>> No.55713524

I'm not the one throwing around ultimatums in an attempt to warp the story around myself and fuck you if you think that's acceptable behavior from anyone, let alone a player.
>sadly, this is why tg isnt all that interesting
/tg/ isn't interesting nowadays because everything feels the same and morons have forgotten how to create a setting that isn't borrowing most of its shit from other well established settings. It's hard to feel excited when every 2-bit GM on roll20 lets anything fly in their campaigns because they were taught to never say no and accomidate any idea, no matter how stupid and disruptive it ends up being.
Again, you're missing the point where the guy in your scenario asked the GM to allow his snowflake race to exist vs. the dude in the OP who tried to force it by saying "if you don't let me do this, I walk!"

People need to learn to read sentences so they don't end up looking like idiots.

>> No.55713621
File: 1.09 MB, 1240x1262, Lilim.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Okay, so what do you propose? And why the cultures/races meant to be "exotic, faraway" or "monstrous" don't work for you?

>> No.55713668

It's easy to give some leeway while still setting a line, you awkward fucks. Not saying you have to let anyone play anything you don't want to, but the idea that people will take advantage of you if you negotiate just a little is ridiculous. It's an RPG, there is literally nothing at stake.

>> No.55713696


>> No.55713703

>Not saying you have to let anyone play anything you don't want to
Then shut the fuck up and choose something that actually fits in the setting snowflake!

It ain't rocket science.

>> No.55713943

>the idea that people will take advantage of you if you negotiate just a little is ridiculous
It's also not a position anyone is holding.

Almost everyone saying "kick them out" is doing it because of the dickish ultimatum, not because they're asking for something different.

>> No.55713958

>implying DMs dont need players more than players need them

>> No.55714059

Most players aren't going to dedicate the time and energy to produce a decent campaign or be willing to compromise long enough for the campaign to not be a merry-go-round of NPC's who are, like, totally badass and cool and watch how they kill an ebin level boss fight in one hit because they're so awesome and would, like, totally kill you with their pinky finger if they wanted to.

Players need GM's more than GM's need players, which is why GM's are free to dismiss your snowflakey ass without losing sleep while finding a decent GM is a matter of trial and error that could span weeks/months/years if you don't know how you detect red flags soon enough.

>> No.55714153

I talk to them about WHY nothing I've suggested doesn't appeal to them, then see if we can make a character that addresses those issues within the given framework instead of going against it, but if that isn't possible then I let the player know that there may very well be consequenses to playing a character who goes so against the norms of the society.

In other words, I react like a reasonable person, not some turbo-autist who can't handle a challenge

>> No.55714185

"But anon, before I start a campaign I talk to the players about what kind of things they'd be interested in playing. All the others are hooked on this campaign. I'll ask them if they'd be okay with a different setting, if not I'm afraid you have to drop out."

>> No.55714195

>In other words, I react like a reasonable person, not some turbo-autist who can't handle a challenge
You know what else is a good challenge? Holding your head underwater for ten minutes.

>> No.55714260

The issue isn't really trying to bargain for some special favor from the GM.

The issue is that this is a person who is willing to end a request like that with an ultimatum.

I don't even care what he asked of me. He might even have accidentally asked me about something I already allow in my campaign.
It doesn't matter; his way of speaking is a huge red flag, indicating that he's going to be an intolerable shit.

He's out.

>> No.55714312

>literally spending a few minutes working out how to maximise the happiness of the group is like drowning yourself

Sorry, not autism, ADHD

>> No.55714369

I'm not maximizing the happiness of the group, I'm playing to the demands of a snowflake who is apparently too good to play something that actually exists, while believing that they're so important to the group that they can force ultimatums onto me in an effort to throw their weight around.

Notice, everyone else got with the program, so the only one not trying to maximize the happiness of the group is you.

Also dipshit, I'm telling you to drown yourself in a bathtub. It's not a simile, it's a request.

>> No.55714481

>"the only one trying to maximise the happiness of the group is you"
You say that like I shouldn't be doing that? Like that isn't the job of the GM?

>"while believing that they're so important to the group that they can force ultimatums"
That's not how the OP is phrased, the message I got from the OP was "Hey, I'd love to play and have shown an interest in your campaign setting, but I'd love to have some input in a way that I think can make my character a bit more interesting" which is fairly reasonable. If they're a dick about it, they can walk.

>> No.55714566

First off, read the actual quote here >>55714369
>so the only one NOT trying to maximize the happiness of the group is you.
Secondly, nobody who phrases a request with an ultimatum like that is really interested in playing in your game. At best, they're doing it to get some attention from a captive audience and at worse, they're a fucking narcissist who believes that their presence is so sought after that they can threaten their own absence and have you bend over backwards to suit their needs, more so than the rest of the party.

Either way, you're better off letting them walk based on principle than having them stick around and (attempt to) warp the narrative around how special and unique their character concept is.

>> No.55714936

It's coercive wording. When you toss an ultimatum into a conversation so casually and without any buildup, you are putting a lot of unnecessary pressure on the other party. Not only is it completely uncalled for, it also demonstrates a lack of motivation to compromise or negotiate.

>> No.55714976

>"Sure! I have an exotic race that is made of bundles I sticks. I'm certain that you will find Faggot-People to your liking!"

>> No.55715039

>Again, you're missing the point where the guy in your scenario asked the GM to allow his snowflake race to exist vs. the dude in the OP who tried to force it by saying "if you don't let me do this, I walk!"
But there is no difference, you stupid shit. You are trying to shoehorn one yourself and to a situation you weren't even around. Because guess what the shapeshifter guy said - "either this is allowed, or I have nothing left to play". And NOBODY MINDED, because seriously, how many years you can play the same human cleric-like character?

So if you are too lazy to work around all the issues your party might face and/or create, you are just a lousy GM. It's that simple.
And reading from the rest of your post it's obvious you are an incompetent GM to that, since anything that doesn't go YOUR way is instantly forbidden.
0/10, would not like to play with you. And not because your idiotic "hurrr speshial snoflaiks durrr", but because you are an incompetent asshole living in a bubble.

>> No.55715061


>> No.55715074

>I'm playing to the demands of a snowflake who is apparently too good to play something that actually exists
Anon, you shouldn't be GMing.
At all.
Because with attitude like that, you are literally taking the party hostage by saying "Either you play what I want you to play, or I don't run". I know my group would pack their things and leave if you would pull that shit.
If you can't compromise - don't run games.

>> No.55715083

Then I'll be a phonex person sorcerer with dragon lineage

>> No.55715169

>0/10, would not like to play with you.
Oh wow, I don't have to deal with your snowflake ass while trying to run a game for the rest of the party, whatever shall I do?

Oh right, continue doing what I'm doing while you hit the bricks. Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out btw, I don't feel like wiping shit stains off the handle.


>> No.55715216

>Because with attitude like that, you are literally taking the party hostage by saying "Either you play what I want you to play, or I don't run".
You signed up to play in my campaign, using my setting, and now that we've sat down to play, now is the time you want to start throwing curveballs and ultimatums as far as what you want to play?

You're pretty much saying that if I sign up for a CoC campaign and I build Saitama, I should be justified in telling the GM that either everything I punch turns to goop in one hit or I pack up my shit and leave because I'm an independent player who don't need no GM or no rulebook.

I'm glad your group would pack up and leave, mainly because it saves me the trouble of filtering you fags out three sessions in and I can advertise to people who wouldn't try to run roughshed just because they think that they're entitled to any character concept they want like the petulant children that they are.

>> No.55715320

If you go to someone's house for a barbeque, do you tell them "I don't like any of your food. Either make me a cherry pie from scratch, or maybe bake a turkey for me, or I'm leaving."?

If you did say that, do you expect that the host would say anything other than "Okay, bye" at the most polite?

It is literally the GM's job to arbitrate what is and isn't possible or an option in a game. Talking like the OP is dickish and needlessly confrontational and rude.

>> No.55715522

Sure just use outsider ratings for initial reaction.

>> No.55715532
File: 196 KB, 547x416, RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGE.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Bait thread
>Almost 200 replies
It's fucking October already! Why the hell you act as if it was the middle of the fucking summer break?

>> No.55715544

This was true before MMOs took off, board games came to dominate the tabletop, and a boutique video game version of Shadowrun could provide a better RPG experience than the actual TTRPG has in years.

Now if you can't find a GM, you don't play elfgames. You play boardgames, or MMOs, or LoL, or some other fucking thing that scratches your fantasy itch. Modern elfgames are not good enough to go hunting for GMs, given the competition.

>> No.55715600

>You signed up to play in my campaign, using my setting, and now that we've sat down to play, now is the time you want to start throwing curveballs and ultimatums as far as what you want to play?
Ever heard about two-way deal? A non-zero sum game, where both sides win?
Wait, why I even bother, if you act as if it was fucking early 80s and openly quote the "GM vs player" handbook printed back then by TSR. Well, not verbatim, but close enough.

>> No.55715652

Welcome to nu/tg/, it's like you weren't around for past few years.
And it's start of academic year all around the world, so all the freshmen are starting their new groups, thus we will be drowning in threads like this one at least till Christmas.

>> No.55715747

It's not a two-way street though, it has never been a two-way street, and it will never fucking BE a two way street.

The only thing that players are responsible for is coming prepared and not being disruptive. The GM on the other hand has to handle literally everything else, from the setting, to the NPC's, to the combat, the enemies, the EXP (when applicable) that gets handed out, to what does or does not exist within their setting.

If I'm taking time out of my day to construct a campaign for you to participate in, the very least you can do is show up with a valid character that fits within my setting and not be a bitch if I tell you that the character concept you made doesn't fit or needs tweaking.

After that, it's your job to either make a character that fits or GTFO. If you don't like it, run your own game.

>> No.55715792
File: 11 KB, 261x191, 5f0c3e22.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>It's not a two-way street though, it has never been a two-way street, and it will never fucking BE a two way street.
Like the first anon said - stop GMing.

>> No.55715813

I'm sorry, when you sign up as a co-GM and help construct most of the campaign for me, then you can have full rights to say what does or doesn't exist within the setting.

Otherwise, no little timmy, you can't play Gurren Lagann in my ShadowRun campaign.

>> No.55715872

This is why I build my settings with intentional blanks. If one of my players asks for something wacky, it usually makes for a better story working it in than whatever I would've filled the blanks with otherwise.

For example, in my current game I only very loosely defined history beyond ~100 years ago. So when a player came up to me asking if he could be a dragonborn when they didn't exist in the setting, we worked together to come up with a story about him being resurrected by a powerful necromancer after the dragonborn were accidentally created and then genocided 600 years ago. Meanwhile, another player wanted to play a catgirl, and I just said no to that because I've had problems with them in the past.

RPGs are about collaborative storytelling. You don't have to bend over backwards to please your players. In fact, if you do you're probably fucking it up. But meeting them halfway will frequently give you a better story than what you come up with yourself.

>> No.55715888

I wouldn't be dismissing if it wasn't phrased as an ultimatum. Now if it was more of a "hey I'd really appreciate it" we can talk.

>> No.55715898

Summer is a myth that's been disproven. It's like this all year round, bruv.

>> No.55715914

I don't even know what that is, but sure, you have the 100% authority.
And players that probably couldn't find a replacement, so stayed.

It's almost like in your entire life you never run or played or even saw people playing freeform or sandbox games. Or, which is even more funny, never run a dungeon crawl. Or never allowed your players to leave not only rails, but also the seats they have in that train.
That would be the only situation when you are "contructing everything". And it would be your own god-damn fault.

>> No.55715916

Do those things work with the established premise of the campaign?
If yes, I can work something out with the player, if not, then I explain why that's a bad idea.

>> No.55715950

Our job as a DM is to facilitate fun. That doesn't mean bending over backwards for your players, but it also doesn't mean they have to do so for you.

>> No.55715978

Why do we owe you an explanation exactly? We made out pitch. You declined indicating you are not interested. You didn't ask- you gave me a choice. I made it. There is no reason to waste my time or yours in further discussion.

The reason, fwiw, is quite simple. Player wants to be more exotic than the options already given. This character would be jarring to the story and setting- disruptive to the other players and the preferred level of immersion our table desires. We want different things. That's fine. Goodbye.

In game, I expect a GM to justify things. But this isn't in game. This is a negotiation about personal expectations and desires in a shared activity. The player made a clear and hard bottom line. I balked. Leave it at that and you get to leave with professional respect- possibly a follow up call for the next campaign. Be a catty little bitch about how I didn't change the game for you, and you're blacklisted.

>> No.55715991

>It's almost like in your entire life you never run or played or even saw people playing freeform or sandbox games.
Wow, it's almost as if you've never made a setting before and depend on your players to carry the load for you like the leech that you are.

So tell me senpai, when exactly do the players decide that they're going to run into goblins during the session? At one point do they decide who they're going to meet in the town several miles south of their current location? How about something as simple as deciding who the Big Bad is?

I mean, if the GM isn't responsible for that then that obviously means that it's taken as a group consensus right?

>> No.55715999

Summer is true. Eternal summer. It's like the summer in 2013 never ended and we went straight from nazimods to the complete clusterfuck of the opposite direction.
The last nail to the coffin was creation of /qst/, since the vaccum it created was taken almost entirely by shitposting.

>> No.55716021

Anyone who doesn't like the way I run my campaign is free to leave and I'll just ask other people if they'd be willing to play.

>> No.55716045

I'm pretty convinced you've never run a game in your life.

Even if you have, not everyone likes anything-goes freeform RP. Most people grow out of that after spending a few of their teen years on Gaia Online forums and the like.

>> No.55716077

Different anon, but giving explaination would be simply the right thing to do? This way it's clear to both the player making the question and the rest of the party there is an actual, logical and coherent reason why this or that shit is not allowed. Even if the idea itself is complete clusterfuck, you DO owe those people explaination. Mostly because they are there to play game and have fun. Part of this includes undestanding all the "whats" and "whys". Otherwise you are leaving it open to their interpretation why you made this or that decision regarding their characters, course of the game etc. And this can quickly turn into a serious problem if continues, because nothing hurts the party cohesion and player trust toward their own GM more than impression they are playing a game run by someone making completely arbitrary decisions.

tl;dr basic human courtesy applies to everyone, especially to the host

>> No.55716122

>Pitch me an idea. If I like it and you've got a good way to work it in, I'll let it pass.
After that we'll see. Otherwise I might have to let them go.

Sidenote: Why do people keep putting that shitty bandaid looking garbage on characters' faces like in OP's pic?

>> No.55716145

And I'm pretty convinced you can run anything else than fucking railroad, dismissing freeform as something "lesser", just because you are no longer in control. Are you compensating for something or what?

And for the record, I'm playing since 2001 and running since 2007. This might shock you, but different people like different things and different approach. But I've yet have to meet a group that likes being treated like cattle.

>> No.55716151

Because there's some legitimate discussion to be had and not literally every poster on /tg/ has had it yet?

>> No.55716159

Are you like a professional DM? Do you get hired and paid to run these games? Because that's the only scenario I can imagine where your stance is warranted. Isn't the point of these games to have a good time with some friends? You're taking yourself way to seriously if you're kicking people to the curb because they're not willing to unequivocally accept your decisions.

>> No.55716202

>People aren't allowed to take their hobbies seriously unless they're getting paid.
Wow, glad you aren't in my games you waste of oxygen.

>> No.55716206

The fact that you see the world as either freeform or railroading speaks volumes.

Given that you're trying to make statements like "different people like different things" after dismissing anything but your way as treating people like cattle just makes you a hypocrite on top of it.

>> No.55716222

This thread is anything, but legitimate discussion. It's comes with obvious bait opener, followed by a bunch of faggots arguing below something that isn't even an issue in a first place, as long as you follow one of 4chan's core rules.
You know, being adult.

>> No.55716236

>This thread is anything, but legitimate discussion. It's comes with obvious bait opener
Iunno, "what do you do when a player throws a curveball and how do you remain civil if it isn't to your liking" is good advice for newcomers and autistic lads.

>followed by a bunch of faggots arguing below something that isn't even an issue in a first place
Oh yeah, no, those are cunts.

>> No.55716238

Not him, but like he said, the only scenario when you can treat players like dirt is them being unable to replace you, probably due to living in Nowhere, Nebraska or other small-town shithole.

>> No.55716240

>In game, I expect a GM to justify things.
Yes, but the player-applicant is not a player and I am not justifying something about the game. This is a discussion of preference. I don't have to justify my preferences.

These basically have the right idea. The player-applicant did not ask. The player-applicant stated clearly they intended not to participate if their demand was not met. Some demands are reasonable enough to capitulate. This one does not work for me or my current group. I am not going to debate the player-applicants desire- that is immature, disrespectful, and asinine. I likewise am not going to debate or justify my desire for the same reason.

It would be proper *courtesy* to be respectful of my stated preference and not get offended or demand explanation when it doesn't align with yours. The same courtesy I extended to the player-applicant. Further discussion challenges the assumption that we are both adults who can choose our own preferences competently. I offer no explanation because there is nothing to discuss, except how one of us is supposedly wrong about our preferences. Do you not see how that discussion itself is therefore disrespectful to one or both parties?

>> No.55716255
File: 871 KB, 500x216, 8495657.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Implying this hard
Try harder, kid. No, seriously, TRY HARDER.

>> No.55716271

When did /tg/ get so bad about biting obvious bait.

>> No.55716277

Wait, did you just said you are making your personal preferences into game ruling?
Or implied players have no other choice and simply must play with you, the way you want it?

>> No.55716288

You misunderstand me. I also take this hobby, and DMing, seriously. What I'm saying is that the DM-player relationship is give and take. When my players challenge me on decisions I make during a game, or tell me what things i can change about my game to make it more enjoyable for them, I don't say "gtfo I'm in charge". I work towards a solution that benefits both, and we can all have fun.

Again, nothing wrong with taking the game seriously. What I said was you are taking yourself to seriously.

>> No.55716326

Thing is, you stupid piece of shit, nobody is FORCING people to play with you. And you act like, I don't know, you were their boss at work. They are players. They came there to play. Have fun. Spend their free time together playing game of pretend. Not being ordered around. Jesus, how the fuck you even manage to get players with attitude like that?
For someone speaking so much about "player obligations" and "proper courtesy", you do none of that. You oblige yourself to nothing and assume your players are there for your own personal amusement.
I've got a solution for you - start writing modules. There is a market for that and pretty penny to make. It will keep you fully in charge of everything and no pesky players to ruin your perfect game with their suggestions, interactions or mere presence.

>> No.55716340

It's cute. that said that particular instance is strange since the paint was apparently thick and dry enough to leave sharp, crisp edges but also somehow thin enough to run in a single tiny rivulet down her cheek.

>> No.55716360

Because your autism forces you to argue with people instead of simply brushing them off

>> No.55716366

Sure, why not, we can always add another Island to the Archipelago, as long as it's not too overbalancing.

Just keep in mind that it's not just you playing, and good sportsmanship is important.

>> No.55716395

>instead of simply brushing them off
But that's exactly what autism is - ignoring other people and holing down in your own world. Then run on rampage when they disrupt your perfect imaginary harmony.

>> No.55716418

Since /qst/ became a thing.

>> No.55716486

>what do you do when a player throws a curveball and how do you remain civil if it isn't to your liking
Like I've said - being adult solves this. That's why it's a non-issue and what makes this thread into a bait.

>> No.55716561

>"it is literally the GM's job to arbitrate what is and isn't possible"
Then surely adding one extra feature to keep your players happy falls within that? Unless you feel like you have no control over your own setting, in which case you're a shit GM, git gud.

>> No.55716620
File: 4 KB, 225x225, lowbait.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>you stupid piece of shit
How unprofessional and disrespectful you've made the conversation. That's going in your performance evaluation, Steve.

You seem to be having trouble differentiating in-game rulings from out-game rulings. The out-game rulings are absolutely based on my personal preference, as well as the personal preference of everyone who comes into my home wednesday nights. If I do not want to associate with you for any reason- even if as trivial as "I don't like your voice"- then you are not invited. That much is absolutely my personal preference, yes, and I am thoroughly unapologetic for it.

To put it another way, I am not by any sane stretch of the imagination required to take people I don't like into my home and play games with them. Why would I do that? Why would I even discuss doing that?

But more to the point- it isn't actually personal in OP's scenario. Its not that I don't like the player-applicant. I just don't desire to play in or run the game they wish to play. So I'm not going to. No discussion is going to change that. So why have such a discussion?

This discussion is to illustrate the nuance of assertiveness- something many nerds and teenagers struggle with. Though at a certain point further discussion will be irrelevantly giving a troll attention. I've probably said enough for the sensible lurkers to comprehend my meaning.

>> No.55716634

So what's the adult thing to do in this situation? Say it explicitly.

>> No.55716687

>Then surely adding one extra feature to keep your players happy falls within that?
Not when it's one faggot making a big deal out of it.

>> No.55716704
File: 52 KB, 500x501, rapier.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.55716719

I'd ask if you're Derek

>> No.55716720

The only people making big deal out of it are all those autists in this thread who keep bitching how players should know their place and how they are doing all the heavylifting as GMs.
Normal people just look for compromise, rather than ranting about special snowflakes

>> No.55716746

>Thread starts off with someone forcing an ultimatum
>Clearly, the people telling him to leave are the unreasonable ones.
Whatever faggot, take a walk.

>> No.55716767

>And you act like...you were their boss at work
if he's the GM then technically he is the boss of the group of players, as long as he's not an unreasonable dick about it.
Players get to petition, they don't get to demand.

>> No.55716782

Creating an entire new race and/or culture is not a minor undertaking, unless you just don't care about the setting at all and neither do your players.

But, as stated many times in this threat, that isn't the point. The point is that the player in the OP is being an entitled jackass by trying to use an ultimatum to force the GM to do what they want.

It's better for everyone to eject that sort of player ASAP.

>> No.55716814

GM runs a Game. Player wants a Thing. GM judges if the Thing can be added and how. If there is just no way to add it and/or it would threaten the whole campaign (say, explicitly making a character from high TL, carrying a lot of high TL gear, all in a very low TL setting), Player is informed about it, along with Reasoning why not. If there is a way to grant Player the Thing, but it requires from Player to step down a bit, GM informs about that too. In the end either a compromise is met or the Player is well informed why the Thing wasn't allowed.
Thus, they have a normal chat about evaluation of a concept that might or might not work out for their game. Meaning acting like adults.

Yes, those capital letters are part of the message, no, I'm not German.

>> No.55716849

>goes on a roleplaying board
>gets mad when people respond to something that prompts them to roleplay and share their philosophies on roleplaying
No, anon, you are the faggots.

>> No.55716862

Considering how the rest of the comment goes, he not only is an unreasonable dick, but also enjoys it, so go figure.

>It's better to be lazy piece of shit and quickly avoid any challenge
And here is a tip, so you can have a simple solution. Player want new race/culture? Sure, allow it. Let them prepare it for you. No workload for you, then you and the rest of players can read it and judge it. A win-win, because a "special snowflake" won't bother and a dedicated player will provide.
But better to just show them the door, right?

>> No.55716872

So the adult thing to do is to accept a passive-aggressive ultimatum from someone you'll need to work with for the duration of the campaign?

>> No.55716879
File: 18 KB, 224x225, 1401766879518.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Replies to a bait post
>In a bait thread
What is this? Baitception?

>> No.55716890

It seems this player and I wish to run different sorts of games, I'd tell him he probably shouldn't play with this group and try to point him to a setting/group where he would have more luck

>> No.55716892

>1) GM presented players a choice
>2) Player A is not interested of choice and demands additional options upon penalty of leaving the game
>3) GM tells player A not to threaten him with a good time.

>> No.55716895

>But better to just show them the door, right?
Yes, because if they can't accept no during chargen, it stands to reason that they won't accept no during the campaign.

>> No.55716895,1 [INTERNAL] 

Does anyone have the Exalted 3E Fanfare for the Chosen Music Suite and the EX3 Wallpapers?



>> No.55716916

Players are an abundant and easily acquired resources. I'll change players far before I change the game I'm running because I'm there to run the game I want to run. I will find players who want to play that game.

I'm not really obligated to cater to strangers, so I won't. If the guy was a friend I'd work with him, but if he was a random I'd simply tell him the campaign isn't for him.

>> No.55716933

>So the adult thing to do is to accept a passive-aggressive ultimatum from someone you'll need to work with for the duration of the campaign?
See what you are doing right now?
You are acting like a child. Not only you ignore the solution, you also overblow the issue in the first place, use words you apparently don't understand and openly go for a conflict, rather than trying to calm it down or maybe even solve it.
No wonder you need to be explained what's the adult solution then.

>> No.55716936

Welcome to post-irony.

>> No.55716949

this is the opposite of the OP

>> No.55716959
File: 75 KB, 900x600, 102313_1.1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>If someone has a single word that I don't like, then I'm going to boot them and that's the only good solution
>But if they act like that toward me, they are assholes

>> No.55716975

I'm not seeing how what OP described isn't an ultimatum. The adult solution is simply to find a new player and thank the current player for his time. What reason do you have to change your game for a stranger?

>> No.55716979
File: 263 KB, 600x450, 1482086424980.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I'd tell them to read the fucking book, because odds are if they want something "oh so different" from what's already listed, they probably don't know what's listed to begin with.

If they want to propose something different, they'd better have something damn well interesting and original to put on the table.

>> No.55716994
File: 136 KB, 1280x758, white_phyrexia_by_albertrech-d961lwf.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Not going to write a custom species or culture into my setting solely so people can make snowflake characters. If I know the player well and know they're cool I might give it a shot.

If I did allow a playable race of horrible grotesque monsters, they would actually be horrible grotesque monsters, not hot chicks with snakes tails that everyone hates because of "muh cultural misunderstanding."

>> No.55717005

You call this a bait thread, while trying to bait the people you are talking to by declaring anyone who disagrees with your assessment of the situation to be a child.

Maybe try to accept this isn't a black and white situation with a simple, objective choice that resolves any issue. That's why this thread has gotten so many posts and the people posting within it haven't agreed to a simple, objective solution.

>> No.55717014

Why do you people keep ignoring the "trying to force the GM to do what you want with an ultimatum is a dick move" part of this? Nothing you said here resolves that part of the issue.

And yes, that still takes work. You still have to make sure it's all on the up-and-up and fits the established setting. Nobody wants pastel ponies as a PC race in Warhammer, for example.

>> No.55717025


>> No.55717038

I mean, I would try to work with them. I like getting input from my players on what they want, after all it's their fun too. That being said, my real issue would be what the other players think. If everyone is on board and the monster/exotic race isn't too wild then why not?

>> No.55717056

I think this is the only good thing coming from this thread - an inspiration for new trout image.

>> No.55717069

>Why do you people
It's just one retard.

>> No.55717115

Just because your mother never bothered to tell you no doesn't mean that it's a bad word.

You have to be 18+ to post here kid.

>> No.55717156

The real post-irony is how this thread turned into bunch of cretines doing what the OP's image is doing

>> No.55717175
File: 6 KB, 235x206, miss the point.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.55717194

What's the point, that you're a bitch? We already knew that.

>> No.55717195
File: 480 KB, 500x282, This entire thread.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Nah, there is much better image to explain what's going on

>> No.55717211
File: 67 KB, 540x509, 15 best.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Complains about underage
>By acting like a 15 year edgelord
Like pottery

>> No.55717309

Jesus, this thread is still going? I was sure it would auto-sage during the night.

>> No.55717321

But it's not a penalty, so? The player can leave at any time, so how is that even a threat in the first place?

>> No.55717715

>thinks calling someone a bitch is edgy
Wow, calling you a bitch is an insult to actual bitches.

>> No.55717758

propose some of the less monstrous races that could be played in society without it being hunted down on sight. if refused, show the player the door.

>> No.55717760
File: 97 KB, 1280x720, 05 - 7hW0ioa.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Ok I was on your side, but you're making yourself look underage buddy.

>> No.55717796
File: 69 KB, 358x392, 1279696118.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Thinks calling people bitch is anything but what an edgelord would do
Keep it going

>> No.55718055

>I'd like to either play a character from some exotic, faraway culture
Okay, give me an idea of what you want and how it fits in. 9/10 times I will probably just say no, but if you can sell it too me I'll give you a chance.
>>If I can't have either of those, then I'm probably going to drop out of this campaign, since none of these other options interest me.
Ta-ta then.

I have had players come to me asking if they can play non-standard characters and for the most part if they can give me a really good reason and backstory I give them a go. That said, there is a difference between playing as a slightly different elf and wanting to run you rabidly overpowered fanwank super special furry character (I did have a player who wanted too pretty much bring his fursona in-game. He doesnt play in my games any more) into my world. If your character is accepted then understand that, depending on how different it is, it may suffer from prejudice or struggle to communicate. If it is not accepted then, well, I have plenty of players wanting to join. No loss on my account.

>> No.55718083

ITT: People triggered over blatant bait

>> No.55719432

sometimes, my players will ask me about options that lie outside of what i explicitly offer them in the first place.

sometimes, they have ideas that are plausible within my campaign even though i didnt think about it.

But if they want stuff that i explicitly dont want to have there, they can go fuck themselves

>> No.55719581

This exactly. It doesn't bother me that people ask for stupid shit, but they have to ask. The fact that the person would even go to an ultimatum, much less open with it, means they don't really care about the game, just their self insert, and that they are a fucking tool.

>> No.55720085

Our lack of doctors is even more dire than our lack of GMs, that doesn't mean I want someone with a bachelor's in biology operating on me.

>> No.55720213

>How is that a threat in the first place
I see that you've discovered what "Don't threaten me with a good time" means. Later today you'll correctly identify what people mean when they say "Like two pees in a pod" and "It's like riding a bike".

>> No.55720229

I tell him to leave.

Glad that players aren't a scarce resource. Next applicant please.

>> No.55720322

>Hur Learn grammar
>Starts sentence with "and"

>> No.55720403

>Wah, don't call me names :'(
>4chan is supposed to be a safe place!
Why are you fags here?

>> No.55720454

So you people don't brainstorm character ideas together with the GM? Throw a few ideas at the wall and see what sticks? Make a character based on those ideas? That's what we do.

>> No.55720684

I listed literally all of the cultures which produce humans capable of speaking a structured language. If you want to play a nonhuman though then fuck off mate

>> No.55720786

That depends on the system/setting, IMO.

If it's something like L5R then no, adding in someone from an entirely different culture/race is generally a bad idea outside of some niche campaigns like, say, a Crab/Nezumi campaign. The system will either mechanically or narratively unbalance you and make the game worse for everyone else by either handicapping the party or forcing you to the centre of attention.

Settings which are much less defined like, say, a generic fantasy campaign then sure, maybe. Let's look over your combination and see if can't work things out.

A middle ground would be something like WoD or 40k -provided it's within the perusal of human. I'd say no to one guy wanting to play a Mage in a Vampire game or a space marine in a humans game, but a guy originally from another planet/part of the world would be game.

But more importantly, >>55690452

>> No.55720909

This is why I collaborate with my players to make a setting that interests them instead of making one myself whole-cloth.

In my sci-fi game, all players got to make one of the prominent alien races in the galaxy but all player characters are human mercenaries who have merely done jobs for the race that player created.

>> No.55721353

I've got a better one - what underage is doing on 4chan?

>> No.55721367
File: 439 KB, 1495x1200, Consider the following.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Is this HMF? Because it sounds just like it

>> No.55721381

>Expecting reason from people in a bait thead

>> No.55721398

Neither are GMs

>> No.55721424

I still fail to see why people get so ass-blasted over something that isn't a threat, but everyone acts as if it was

>> No.55721465

>It's something that should be encouraged.
Let me guess - American, right? "The important part is trying" and other bullshit like that.
Then here is a twist, junior. Some people were, are and will remain incompetent as GMs, no matter how much time they are going to spend on this.

>> No.55721483

stop with these autistic non situations that never happen. stop please faggot.

>> No.55721505
File: 3.80 MB, 3042x2339, This thread right now.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Jesus fucking Christ, what's wrong with you people?!

>> No.55721543

This is the price we pay for removing quests from /tg/. A thing ironically achieved by bunch of autists crying at the top of their lungs.

>> No.55721586

>He's calling me names
>Clearly he's underaged
>Not me, the one crying over being called names.
Why are you here?

>> No.55721593

There are pretty much always more players than GMs. Because GMs have to do things like actually read the core book/books

>> No.55721601

>Players are an abundant and easily acquired resources.
>I will find players who want to play that game.
There is no relationship between those statements and you know it. And if you are not planning to change anything at all, because "muh own fun, fuck you all", then good luck finding those players.
Especially since GMs are an abundant and easily acquired resource.

>> No.55721619

Regardless of if it was intended to be a threat or not, it shows an inability to change. We're not shaming him because he threatened the GM, he's being shamed because of his refusal to comprimise. If he simply asked if he and the GM could work something out that would be fine, but he said "I'm going to get what I want or I'm leaving". Well great, then leave. That solves both of our problems.

>> No.55721626
File: 29 KB, 446x357, just stop.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

So you won't feel lonely, anon-kun

>> No.55721628

Hobgoblin Cleric of Red Knight is my go-to forgotten realms character.

>> No.55721650

>it shows an inability to change
The irony of this statement is fucking astronomical.
If anything, the whole situation as played out by autists in this thread boils down to "I can't adopt to anything at all nor change nor I'm willing to even try, so that's why I'm a GM and send people off on any issue at all".

>> No.55721679

It solves nothing. And like already pointed out by some other anon, neither of parties is capable of changing and both decide to entrench themselves. Booting players, because they like something you don't and vice versa is simply stupid.

>> No.55721741

Allright I'll repeat myself for a third time. Slowly.

The problem is not the player wanting the campaign changed.
The problem is the player presenting an ultimatum. Either you change your setting, or I leave.
The GM should change their setting, they should accomidate the players
Flexibility is important when interacting with other people.
The player started the conversation with a hard, inflexible stance. This leaves the GM no room of conversation, they can't work together to meet a mutual conclusion. Either the GM adds what the player wants, or the player leaves.
So the GM asks the player to leave.

>> No.55721753

Do you mean HFY? Well, not really. It's just that this setting has magic and dragons and monsters and what have you, but humans are the only playable race. No elves, no halflings, no orcs etc. There are dwarves but they are basically autist mountain gnomes, incomprehensible and therefore unplayable.

>> No.55721837
File: 6 KB, 478x492, img_0120.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

You want to repeat your own logical fallacies? What for?

>> No.55721889

>Players never, ever want to play a character outside of the default race and class choices.
Yeah, who's ever heard of a player wanting to play a monstrous race in a humanoid campaign? That shit never happens.

>> No.55721947

I've just posted a missing point image, so just scroll a single post up

>> No.55721955

Where, exactly, is the logical fallacy?

>> No.55722066

Do you genuinely think stuff like this 'never happens?'

>> No.55722334

This particular story never happend. That's how it went. Because the entire thread was a bait.
A bait that managed to hit fucking bump limit

>> No.55722377

>A bait that managed to hit fucking bump limit
What else is new?

>> No.55722644

Pretty sure that anon thinks "logical fallacy" is a magic word in English that makes English-speakers immediately yield in any argument even if they're correct.

>> No.55722655

You can't honestly see nothing wrong with the player's actions here. "Change this or I leave"? To start a conversation? How is a GM supposed to respond to that? It's the GM's responsibility to tether the disparate elements of the setting and other PCs together. They can't just bend to the player's will every time, the player needs to provide some avenue of compromise.

>> No.55722776

You're talking to someone who unironically sees the GM as existing purely for the pleasure and benefit of the players, and who hates being told no. Not sure why you're even still bothering. You should know by now that that anon isn't going to understand.

>> No.55722790

It wouldn't surprise me if he was a special snowflake who spouts rhetoric he saw on reddit or facebook one time.

>> No.55722818

ITT: Reasons why players who demand, rather than request, are better left outside than invited to a second game.

I sincerely hope that the people ITT who think that it's okay to throw ultimatums at the GM are pretending to be retarded for (you)'s, because otherwise I shudder to think about the direction the hobby is taking when snowflakes actually think that they can pull rank in a hobby where players are not in short supply.

>> No.55723588

I opened this thread last night and had a good laff at the apparent congregation of obvious trolls being obvious. I didn't close the thread before nodding off.

Now I find the tab on my phone the next evening and the thread is full of some of the most inane, low quality bait I've seen in years. And people are falling for it hook, line and sinker.

Actually makes me glad, in a way. It means /tg/ still attracts good people who, at least for the moment, maintains that pure almost naïve belief that behind every post is a confused person waiting to be shown the light through honest discussion.

Thanks for making yet another night, /tg/. You keep being here for me year after year after year.

This basically

>> No.55724949

That's why no one who isnt a professional musician has ever written a song and had it become . . . hey wait a minute.

>> No.55725281

False equivalence.

Also you didn't read the post you're responding to.

>> No.55725598

>You are the GM for a fantasy campaign. During character creation, one of your players has this to say about his character:
>How do you react?

Of course it didn't happen, it's worded as a hypothetical situation.

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