So for context I am running a low fantasy campaign soon, limited the races that are playable to fit the setting, The races are human, Lizardfolk, Tortles, a reflavored orc called Gurak, Genasi and Elves (These last two are weird as they are really rare, both are magical mutations of human.)
Got like 4 players, but one of them has been giving me hell about the race selection, claiming I should not be using DND as a system for this because I'm not letting them play what he wants.
Extra bit of context me and this person are not on the best of terms. He as a GM has told me no to playing multiple races in his game for reasons of "Too rare to be a playable character." So I'm feeling a bit heated that he's trying to claim I should let him play something that would not fit the setting.
Is telling him to not even bother showing up too harsh?
If a player doesn't even respect the DM's campaign limits before session 0, for me it's hard to consider continuing with such person, especially if both of you have some history.
If i were to continue with this player, i would surly issue a warning that if i see recurrent negativity from him i won't hesitate to boot him out to preserve the table spirit and integrity, which is often an undervalued yet very important aspect of a satisfying D&D experience.
Depends on how much you want to play with them. I’d maybe try once more and say something like. This is the world I built, and these are the options, if you don’t like them, you don’t need to play, but I’m not discussing this any more.
But, since you know them and you have some history, you know better. Probably, you should just tell them that they’re not welcome in the group. I’m saying this because you say you’re not on good term to begin with. Also, I’m getting a sense that they’re going to be a hassle again and again as you keep playing — better to nip that in the bud and find a new player who actually wants to be in your game.
A third option is to let them play what they want and say they’re a crashed spelljammer, or planar traveler. But they need to be prepared to be a spectacle that everyone in the world will stare at, some may even want to kill the freak of nature on sight, that kind of thing.
D&D is meant to be fun for everyone playing, including you. If you two can't find a way to both have fun, then it isn't a good fit for your table. Simple. I personally would try to make it work without compromising the game I wanted to run, but the game will run with three.
Thanks for the advice, will try and talk to them. Not often I get frustrated like this but as I mentioned me and this player have some history, good and bad.
Speak with them prior to the session and acknowledge that their objections have been heard; and then reinforce, politely, that the conditions and restrictions for this particular game have been set. These apply to all players and it fits the world of the campaign that you wish to run. The player then has a choice to either 1) accept these conditions and play within the boundaries you set as a GM or 2) choose not to participate. It does not need to be any more detailed than that.
You should work to establish that it ultimately is the player making the choice to participate or not. If it comes down to them refusing to choose and you have to notify them they are not going to partake in the game; it should be established it is because the player has made it clear they object to the conditions the GM is setting and are not willing to cease with the objections and play within the acceptable conditions the GM has established.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So for context I am running a low fantasy campaign soon, limited the races that are playable to fit the setting, The races are human, Lizardfolk, Tortles, a reflavored orc called Gurak, Genasi and Elves (These last two are weird as they are really rare, both are magical mutations of human.)
Got like 4 players, but one of them has been giving me hell about the race selection, claiming I should not be using DND as a system for this because I'm not letting them play what he wants.
Extra bit of context me and this person are not on the best of terms. He as a GM has told me no to playing multiple races in his game for reasons of "Too rare to be a playable character." So I'm feeling a bit heated that he's trying to claim I should let him play something that would not fit the setting.
Is telling him to not even bother showing up too harsh?
If a player doesn't even respect the DM's campaign limits before session 0, for me it's hard to consider continuing with such person, especially if both of you have some history.
If i were to continue with this player, i would surly issue a warning that if i see recurrent negativity from him i won't hesitate to boot him out to preserve the table spirit and integrity, which is often an undervalued yet very important aspect of a satisfying D&D experience.
Depends on how much you want to play with them. I’d maybe try once more and say something like. This is the world I built, and these are the options, if you don’t like them, you don’t need to play, but I’m not discussing this any more.
But, since you know them and you have some history, you know better. Probably, you should just tell them that they’re not welcome in the group. I’m saying this because you say you’re not on good term to begin with. Also, I’m getting a sense that they’re going to be a hassle again and again as you keep playing — better to nip that in the bud and find a new player who actually wants to be in your game.
A third option is to let them play what they want and say they’re a crashed spelljammer, or planar traveler. But they need to be prepared to be a spectacle that everyone in the world will stare at, some may even want to kill the freak of nature on sight, that kind of thing.
D&D is meant to be fun for everyone playing, including you. If you two can't find a way to both have fun, then it isn't a good fit for your table. Simple. I personally would try to make it work without compromising the game I wanted to run, but the game will run with three.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
Thanks for the advice, will try and talk to them. Not often I get frustrated like this but as I mentioned me and this player have some history, good and bad.
Speak with them prior to the session and acknowledge that their objections have been heard; and then reinforce, politely, that the conditions and restrictions for this particular game have been set. These apply to all players and it fits the world of the campaign that you wish to run. The player then has a choice to either 1) accept these conditions and play within the boundaries you set as a GM or 2) choose not to participate. It does not need to be any more detailed than that.
You should work to establish that it ultimately is the player making the choice to participate or not. If it comes down to them refusing to choose and you have to notify them they are not going to partake in the game; it should be established it is because the player has made it clear they object to the conditions the GM is setting and are not willing to cease with the objections and play within the acceptable conditions the GM has established.