True. But it’s also about group story telling. The players contribute to that, just like the DM. And also, cute eyes! Sometimes, you gotta do what you gotta do for the cute eyes. ; )
RPGs really aren't about group story telling; stories based on RPGs are almost always utterly terrible. If you want to do group story telling... do group story telling, don't mix RPGs into it.
As for cute eyes: I can't comment on your priorities, but I will tell you that doing things in-game for out-of-game reasons is quite bad for the game.
Considering that the intended audience is comprised of the same group of people telling the story, I don’t agree with you. That story might be terrible to everyone else, but since nobody else is intended to be audience members for 99.9999% of the stories being told through RPGs, their tastes are irrelevant. As long as the group immersed in the story is entertained then yer golden.
isn't that a bit harsh Sposta? I understand that it's a joke, but still, jeez man.
My answer to this kinda stuff is almost always “you can certainly try.” I wouldn’t tell a player “no, your PC may not do that,” I don’t want to take away the players agency like that. But I can certainly convey the implication that it has a very high likelihood of not working out too well for them. If they insist then I let it go and let the chips fall where they may. Sometimes, despite all odds, the PCs pull off whatever hairbrained idea the player(s) cooked up. “Bravo” I say to that, “bravo indeed.” But most of the time things turn out as I anticipated. There’s a reason my players are always wary of situations to which I say “you can certainly try.” So to this player I would say, “you can certainly try,” and hopefully by the time they actually do encounter the tarrasque, she would have picked up what I was puttin’ down for her.
You know what, fair, I'd normally say, "Are you sure??" and if they say okay I'd have them roll a DC 25 animal handling check and if they fail, then they roll initiative with disadvantage.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Your friendly trans bard!
She/They pronouns
The Goddess of the Strings (thanks for the title Drummer!)
You know what, fair, I'd normally say, "Are you sure??" and if they say okay I'd have them roll a DC 25 animal handling check and if they fail, then they roll initiative with disadvantage.
DC 25? That’s mighty generous of you. 😜 But you see where I’m coming from and even admit you would do much the same thing in your own way. I would never just have a tarrasque gobble up the party to prove that befriending it is a less than survivable goal. But if they willingly choose to feed themselves to the damned thing I sure as 💩 ain’t gonna stop them either.
I’d make it very clear that it’s a terrible idea and tell them that it expects belly scratches at least 3 times a day and it’s giant. It also needs tons of food so it’ll be sure to eat you out of the house if it doesn’t eat the house first.
Fair, I DM a bit more laid back, and if they did tame it, then the next long rest they have in an inn may result in that town having an... incident, showing that these scary monsters that eat people are foes, not friends, who'd have guessed?
it’s your campaign. Don’t be afraid to say no to players with crazy ideas :)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Hey, I’m moon, i‘m aged between 3 and 300. Pronouns are She/They/It/It’s/Them/Her. I love D&D. I am chaotic neutral irl. I’m not afraid to punch someone. Mess with me and you’ll find out the hard way. extended sig
I am the goddess of the moon, the tides, and the axolotls
Fair, I DM a bit more laid, back, and if they did tame it, then the next long rest they have in an inn may result in that town having an... incident, showing that these scary monsters that eat people are foes, not friends, who'd have guessed?
Let’s not forget that this tarrasque is the only one in existence and lives in the earths core or something to that degree.
Fair, I DM a bit more laid, back, and if they did tame it, then the next long rest they have in an inn may result in that town having an... incident, showing that these scary monsters that eat people are foes, not friends, who'd have guessed?
Let’s not forget that this tarrasque is the only one in existence and lives in the earths core or something to that degree.
That's true, didn't think about that BB, I know little about the lore of Forgotten Realms, I don't run many campaigns in that setting
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Your friendly trans bard!
She/They pronouns
The Goddess of the Strings (thanks for the title Drummer!)
it’s your campaign. Don’t be afraid to say no to players with crazy ideas :)
that sorta removes player agency, i think it's good to ward them off, and if they don't heed your warning feel free to let loose on them if they were that foolish
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Your friendly trans bard!
She/They pronouns
The Goddess of the Strings (thanks for the title Drummer!)
Someone have a solution because my druide really obsessed by the tarrasque and she wants be friends with the Monster what I am doing now??.
Have her multi-class one level into Warlock and pick the Tarrasque as her patron (maybe use Great Old One as the subclass? Maybe Fiend, maybe Undying, nothing really fits so just pick something), then have it occasionally commune with her and give her commands and stuff. None of that is typically canon but I'd allow it if a player really wanted to
it’s your campaign. Don’t be afraid to say no to players with crazy ideas :)
that sorta removes player agency, i think it's good to ward them off, and if they don't heed your warning feel free to let loose on them if they were that foolish
Broadly, I agree with this with the caveat that if you're going to allow a player to try something, then there had better be a possibility of success. Letting them attempt something that you know is impossible, or that you absolutely refuse to deal with, is not fair to anyone.
I would much prefer a DM to tell me that my character would know an idea is not feasible than to hint that the idea is bad, give me false hope, and then let me waste time, energy and resources on something that was always completely futile. In this scenario, if befriending the tarrasque is actually impossible (which only the DM can decide), I don't see how allowing the druid to try it does anything more than give the illusion of player agency. If the tarrasque can be befriended, then yeah, go nuts you crazy druid.
A bit of an aside but the image of a druid with Tarrasque brings to mind the South park espisode where Cartman befriends Cthulhu by doing cute cat things..
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
* Need a character idea? Search for "Rob76's Unused" in the Story and Lore section.
it’s your campaign. Don’t be afraid to say no to players with crazy ideas :)
that sorta removes player agency, i think it's good to ward them off, and if they don't heed your warning feel free to let loose on them if they were that foolish
Broadly, I agree with this with the caveat that if you're going to allow a player to try something, then there had better be a possibility of success. Letting them attempt something that you know is impossible, or that you absolutely refuse to deal with, is not fair to anyone.
I would much prefer a DM to tell me that my character would know an idea is not feasible than to hint that the idea is bad, give me false hope, and then let me waste time, energy and resources on something that was always completely futile. In this scenario, if befriending the tarrasque is actually impossible (which only the DM can decide), I don't see how allowing the druid to try it does anything more than give the illusion of player agency. If the tarrasque can be befriended, then yeah, go nuts you crazy druid.
Who says it’s impossible? I mean, it may require a series of DC 30 Animal Handling checks to succeed, but as the DM even I don’t know it’s impossible.
Broadly, I agree with this with the caveat that if you're going to allow a player to try something, then there had better be a possibility of success. Letting them attempt something that you know is impossible, or that you absolutely refuse to deal with, is not fair to anyone.
I would much prefer a DM to tell me that my character would know an idea is not feasible than to hint that the idea is bad, give me false hope, and then let me waste time, energy and resources on something that was always completely futile. In this scenario, if befriending the tarrasque is actually impossible (which only the DM can decide), I don't see how allowing the druid to try it does anything more than give the illusion of player agency. If the tarrasque can be befriended, then yeah, go nuts you crazy druid.
Who says it’s impossible? I mean, it may require a series of DC 30 Animal Handling checks to succeed, but as the DM even I don’t know it’s impossible.
Respectfully, this is a playstyle choice. Some DMs do have some hard and fast rules about what is possible in their game worlds.
For example, in your game you might allow an artificer to invent the first firearm. Another DM might decide that they do not want firearms in their universe and disallow that artificer from attempting to create it. It's no different with the tarrasque. One DM of your playstyle might be open to the dice determining whether the tarrasque can be befriended. Another DM might have a more settled idea of how the tarrasque interacts with other creatures and decide that no attempt at befriending it could result in success. Neither is an inferior playstyle, they're just different approaches to worldbuilding.
It's also worth mentioning that just because a DM might have firmer boundaries for worldbuilding in one situation that they are not necessarily always firm on every boundary. Also, one playstyle might view any limits as an infringement on player agency, while another playstyle might view limits as descriptive prompts for all players to build off of. As for OP, it's up to them to decide whether putting boundaries up for the tarrasque enhances or detracts from their sense of fun.
Broadly, I agree with this with the caveat that if you're going to allow a player to try something, then there had better be a possibility of success. Letting them attempt something that you know is impossible, or that you absolutely refuse to deal with, is not fair to anyone.
I would much prefer a DM to tell me that my character would know an idea is not feasible than to hint that the idea is bad, give me false hope, and then let me waste time, energy and resources on something that was always completely futile. In this scenario, if befriending the tarrasque is actually impossible (which only the DM can decide), I don't see how allowing the druid to try it does anything more than give the illusion of player agency. If the tarrasque can be befriended, then yeah, go nuts you crazy druid.
Who says it’s impossible? I mean, it may require a series of DC 30 Animal Handling checks to succeed, but as the DM even I don’t know it’s impossible.
Respectfully, this is a playstyle choice. Some DMs do have some hard and fast rules about what is possible in their game worlds.
For example, in your game you might allow an artificer to invent the first firearm. Another DM might decide that they do not want firearms in their universe and disallow that artificer from attempting to create it. It's no different with the tarrasque. One DM of your playstyle might be open to the dice determining whether the tarrasque can be befriended. Another DM might have a more settled idea of how the tarrasque interacts with other creatures and decide that no attempt at befriending it could result in success. Neither is an inferior playstyle, they're just different approaches to worldbuilding.
It's also worth mentioning that just because a DM might have firmer boundaries for worldbuilding in one situation that they are not necessarily always firm on every boundary. Also, one playstyle might view any limits as an infringement on player agency, while another playstyle might view limits as descriptive prompts for all players to build off of. As for OP, it's up to them to decide whether putting boundaries up for the tarrasque enhances or detracts from their sense of fun.
I have often found that the most memorable moments in D&D happen not when the DM says “no,” but when they say “yes, and….”
So, in consideration, if I were to allow such a thing, I would make it the intelligent spirit of a Tarrasque, a ghost friend.
But under no circumstances would it have the ability to engage in anything physical.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
it’s your campaign. Don’t be afraid to say no to players with crazy ideas :)
that sorta removes player agency, i think it's good to ward them off, and if they don't heed your warning feel free to let loose on them if they were that foolish
Broadly, I agree with this with the caveat that if you're going to allow a player to try something, then there had better be a possibility of success. Letting them attempt something that you know is impossible, or that you absolutely refuse to deal with, is not fair to anyone.
I would much prefer a DM to tell me that my character would know an idea is not feasible than to hint that the idea is bad, give me false hope, and then let me waste time, energy and resources on something that was always completely futile. In this scenario, if befriending the tarrasque is actually impossible (which only the DM can decide), I don't see how allowing the druid to try it does anything more than give the illusion of player agency. If the tarrasque can be befriended, then yeah, go nuts you crazy druid.
You'll see above that I said that before, says it's an awful, stupid idea, and if they still try give them a chance of success (I said DC 25 animal handling), and if they fail, have the part roll initiative, and if they do succeed there may be some consequences still, as this monster isn't good.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Your friendly trans bard!
She/They pronouns
The Goddess of the Strings (thanks for the title Drummer!)
i appreciate that some players would rather be told their chances and then be left to jump in whenever they're ready. however, i feel like 25 DC doesn't convey mythical challenge. that's closer to the effort of breaking a wild horse. worse yet, quoting a number and saying "you can certainly try" is dangerously easy to misinterpret as "heh, you'll never roll a nat 20 for this." i am rather against a 5% chance to control what the gods could not.
also, i feel like it's anything but disrespectful to put the decision off for a week while beginning a pertinent a line of quests in the meantime. if you're fishing for a quick 'no' on something chaotic, well that's a fun joke. ha ha. if you're fishing for a quick 'yes' on something chaotic, then first make sure the other players at the table are bringing the same energy and looking for the same playstyle. if this druid does get a godzilla friend at level 1? what do the other players get? if the answer is 'they get to politely watch,' then this might be a short lived campaign.
i appreciate that some players would rather be told their chances and then be left to jump in whenever they're ready. however, i feel like 25 DC doesn't convey mythical challenge. that's closer to the effort of breaking a wild horse. worse yet, quoting a number and saying "you can certainly try" is dangerously easy to misinterpret as "heh, you'll never roll a nat 20 for this." i am rather against a 5% chance to control what the gods could not.
also, i feel like it's anything but disrespectful to put the decision off for a week while beginning a pertinent a line of quests in the meantime. if you're fishing for a quick 'no' on something chaotic, well that's a fun joke. ha ha. if you're fishing for a quick 'yes' on something chaotic, then first make sure the other players at the table are bringing the same energy and looking for the same playstyle. if this druid does get a godzilla friend at level 1? what do the other players get? if the answer is 'they get to politely watch,' then this might be a short lived campaign.
why not make it so that it's not the monster manual tarrasque, but instead a CR 1/8 monstrosity called a tarrasque
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Considering that the intended audience is comprised of the same group of people telling the story, I don’t agree with you. That story might be terrible to everyone else, but since nobody else is intended to be audience members for 99.9999% of the stories being told through RPGs, their tastes are irrelevant. As long as the group immersed in the story is entertained then yer golden.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
My answer to this kinda stuff is almost always “you can certainly try.” I wouldn’t tell a player “no, your PC may not do that,” I don’t want to take away the players agency like that. But I can certainly convey the implication that it has a very high likelihood of not working out too well for them. If they insist then I let it go and let the chips fall where they may. Sometimes, despite all odds, the PCs pull off whatever hairbrained idea the player(s) cooked up. “Bravo” I say to that, “bravo indeed.” But most of the time things turn out as I anticipated. There’s a reason my players are always wary of situations to which I say “you can certainly try.” So to this player I would say, “you can certainly try,” and hopefully by the time they actually do encounter the tarrasque, she would have picked up what I was puttin’ down for her.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
You know what, fair, I'd normally say, "Are you sure??" and if they say okay I'd have them roll a DC 25 animal handling check and if they fail, then they roll initiative with disadvantage.
Your friendly trans bard!
She/They pronouns
The Goddess of the Strings (thanks for the title Drummer!)
DC 25? That’s mighty generous of you. 😜 But you see where I’m coming from and even admit you would do much the same thing in your own way. I would never just have a tarrasque gobble up the party to prove that befriending it is a less than survivable goal. But if they willingly choose to feed themselves to the damned thing I sure as 💩 ain’t gonna stop them either.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I’d make it very clear that it’s a terrible idea and tell them that it expects belly scratches at least 3 times a day and it’s giant. It also needs tons of food so it’ll be sure to eat you out of the house if it doesn’t eat the house first.
Characters (Links!):
Faelin Nighthollow - 7th Sojourn
Fair, I DM a bit more laid back, and if they did tame it, then the next long rest they have in an inn may result in that town having an... incident, showing that these scary monsters that eat people are foes, not friends, who'd have guessed?
Your friendly trans bard!
She/They pronouns
The Goddess of the Strings (thanks for the title Drummer!)
it’s your campaign. Don’t be afraid to say no to players with crazy ideas :)
Hey, I’m moon, i‘m aged between 3 and 300. Pronouns are She/They/It/It’s/Them/Her. I love D&D. I am chaotic neutral irl. I’m not afraid to punch someone. Mess with me and you’ll find out the hard way. extended sig
I am the goddess of the moon, the tides, and the axolotls
I am not a furry, I am a fishie.
Let’s not forget that this tarrasque is the only one in existence and lives in the earths core or something to that degree.
Characters (Links!):
Faelin Nighthollow - 7th Sojourn
That's true, didn't think about that BB, I know little about the lore of Forgotten Realms, I don't run many campaigns in that setting
Your friendly trans bard!
She/They pronouns
The Goddess of the Strings (thanks for the title Drummer!)
that sorta removes player agency, i think it's good to ward them off, and if they don't heed your warning feel free to let loose on them if they were that foolish
Your friendly trans bard!
She/They pronouns
The Goddess of the Strings (thanks for the title Drummer!)
Have her multi-class one level into Warlock and pick the Tarrasque as her patron (maybe use Great Old One as the subclass? Maybe Fiend, maybe Undying, nothing really fits so just pick something), then have it occasionally commune with her and give her commands and stuff. None of that is typically canon but I'd allow it if a player really wanted to
Broadly, I agree with this with the caveat that if you're going to allow a player to try something, then there had better be a possibility of success. Letting them attempt something that you know is impossible, or that you absolutely refuse to deal with, is not fair to anyone.
I would much prefer a DM to tell me that my character would know an idea is not feasible than to hint that the idea is bad, give me false hope, and then let me waste time, energy and resources on something that was always completely futile. In this scenario, if befriending the tarrasque is actually impossible (which only the DM can decide), I don't see how allowing the druid to try it does anything more than give the illusion of player agency. If the tarrasque can be befriended, then yeah, go nuts you crazy druid.
A bit of an aside but the image of a druid with Tarrasque brings to mind the South park espisode where Cartman befriends Cthulhu by doing cute cat things..
Who says it’s impossible? I mean, it may require a series of DC 30 Animal Handling checks to succeed, but as the DM even I don’t know it’s impossible.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Respectfully, this is a playstyle choice. Some DMs do have some hard and fast rules about what is possible in their game worlds.
For example, in your game you might allow an artificer to invent the first firearm. Another DM might decide that they do not want firearms in their universe and disallow that artificer from attempting to create it. It's no different with the tarrasque. One DM of your playstyle might be open to the dice determining whether the tarrasque can be befriended. Another DM might have a more settled idea of how the tarrasque interacts with other creatures and decide that no attempt at befriending it could result in success. Neither is an inferior playstyle, they're just different approaches to worldbuilding.
It's also worth mentioning that just because a DM might have firmer boundaries for worldbuilding in one situation that they are not necessarily always firm on every boundary. Also, one playstyle might view any limits as an infringement on player agency, while another playstyle might view limits as descriptive prompts for all players to build off of. As for OP, it's up to them to decide whether putting boundaries up for the tarrasque enhances or detracts from their sense of fun.
I have often found that the most memorable moments in D&D happen not when the DM says “no,” but when they say “yes, and….”
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
So, in consideration, if I were to allow such a thing, I would make it the intelligent spirit of a Tarrasque, a ghost friend.
But under no circumstances would it have the ability to engage in anything physical.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
You'll see above that I said that before, says it's an awful, stupid idea, and if they still try give them a chance of success (I said DC 25 animal handling), and if they fail, have the part roll initiative, and if they do succeed there may be some consequences still, as this monster isn't good.
Your friendly trans bard!
She/They pronouns
The Goddess of the Strings (thanks for the title Drummer!)
i appreciate that some players would rather be told their chances and then be left to jump in whenever they're ready. however, i feel like 25 DC doesn't convey mythical challenge. that's closer to the effort of breaking a wild horse. worse yet, quoting a number and saying "you can certainly try" is dangerously easy to misinterpret as "heh, you'll never roll a nat 20 for this." i am rather against a 5% chance to control what the gods could not.
also, i feel like it's anything but disrespectful to put the decision off for a week while beginning a pertinent a line of quests in the meantime. if you're fishing for a quick 'no' on something chaotic, well that's a fun joke. ha ha. if you're fishing for a quick 'yes' on something chaotic, then first make sure the other players at the table are bringing the same energy and looking for the same playstyle. if this druid does get a godzilla friend at level 1? what do the other players get? if the answer is 'they get to politely watch,' then this might be a short lived campaign.
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
why not make it so that it's not the monster manual tarrasque, but instead a CR 1/8 monstrosity called a tarrasque